It’s started already

Last night, I was channel surfing, and I came across shows adjacent to each other numerically.

One show’s topic was “Radical Islam”. Many people interviewed in this piece, which I won’t describe as journalism but Goebbels-like propaganda, were the same people who chimed on why the US should pursue military action in Iraq. Daniel Pipes was referred to as a “Middle East Scholar”. Daniel Pipes is nothing of the sort. He founded Campus-Watch, an online publication which lists professors that are critical of Israel. I read the articles contained in CampusWatch fairly regularly, so I am familiar with which articles receive a thumbs-up or thumbs-down (literally there is a little thumb symbol). The website is a disgrace meant to intimidate professors who criticize Israeli policy, that’s all. The comments by professors contained on the site do not rise to the level of anti-semitism in general. It’s the online version of David Horowitz’s most-dangerous professor book, which is an ideological first cousin. I read the first 10 entries or so in Horowitz’s book. Same premise basically ; if you criticize Israel and you are a professor, then you will make some list of some lame emotional blackmailer like Pipes or Horowitz.

I flipped back and forth between both shows because I wanted to watch both shows. It’s a shame that the programmers did not coordinate their propaganda a little better so as to maximize the viewership that was reached. They competed with each other timewise.

The other show was Beck’s interview with Benjamin Netanyahu. A little background on Netanyahu before I give you the core message Netanyahu brought to the discussion table:

Netanyahu became notorious when he proclaimed on national television that the 9-11 attacks were “great for Israel”. He argued that since the US was a victim of terrorism, Americans then knew what Israelis felt like, and thus the bond between the countries was strengthened, and Israel had a green light to repress the Palestinians more, under the umbrella of “fighting terrorism”. He called the 9-11 attacks “great for Israel”.

“Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention was focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories.”

He said this while speaking to students at Bar Ilan university (nov 24, 1989)

He was referring to Tiannamen Square (spelling).

These are but two of his public comments, which I feel let readers know exactly who the man is.

Anyway, Beck had Netanyahu on his show, and with his flashy command of the English language and his snappy suit, he comes across more as an American or European than a man from the Middle East. The premise of his entire argument is that the US must take out Ahmadinejad. He’s dangerous, trying to get nukes, hates Jews, wants to wipe them off the map, wants to start another Holocaust, the same old recycled de-bunked arguments, blah blah blah.

Before I am described as an apologist for Ahmadinejad, let me clarify a few points before I make the main point:

1. Ahmadinejad said in Farsi : “Eventually the Zionist regime in Tel-Aviv will fade into history”

as do most regimes, even the US empire will do so (sooner not later if we continue on disastrous courses)

Western media translation ” Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map”. The Farsi quote is accurate, I have read many articles on the mistranslated piece. If bloggers wants to start an aside on this point, fine.

2. Ahmadinejad said “If the Holocaust occurred, and was perpetrated by western European powers against European Jews, then why should the Palestinians be made to suffer?”

He went on to say that it should have been western European countries that provided a Jewish homeland and not the Palestinians.

Western Media translation “Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust “

Now, I do not see the point of challenging the existence of the Holocaust. All evidence points to its occurrence. Assume for a moment that Hilberg’s number of 5.1 million Jews exterminated or Dawidowicz’s number of 5.8 million Jews exterminated are challenged, the actual number of Jewish victims is disputed among the scholars who have studied the issue very closely. Hilberg’s landmark “Destruction of the European Jews” was the first account of the Holocaust, and he is called unofficially the Dean of the Holocaust Historians. There are disputes among the scholars of how many Jews were exterminated. I do not find these discussions useful at all. Even if only 1 million were killed, it was a genocide, plain and simple. A tragedy of immense proportion occurred.

However, I roundly reject the uniqueness argument of the Holocaust. I think it is shameful to suggest that no other suffering by other groups approaches the degree of suffering that Jews experienced during the Holocaust.

The Christians murdered by Stalin, the Chinese under Mao, the slaughtered villagers by Pol Pot, the genocide of 1/3 of the East Timorese, the Native Americans which were sytematically killed and displaced by the US government …

These were all horrible atrocities, and none should be trivialized by comparing the suffering of each group to the suffering of another group

So Ahmadinejad should not make statements which express doubt that the Holocaust happened.

But I do agree with the central point that the Palestinians had nothing to do with the Holocaust, yet history shows that they have been made to suffer as a result; their lands dispossessed, their families displaced. Explain the justice in that situation.

Anyway, back to Netanyahu. He is on Beck’s show and basically saying that the US should take out Iran.

The same arguments are being used by the same principals, that Iran needs to be dealt with, and the US should do it. The main principals making the argument are Israeli officials, pro-Israel neocons that distanced themselves from Bush recently because of Iraq, the same people who supported AIPAC’s national week-long symposium calling for Iran to be dealt with.

What scares me is that I think the Bush admin might try and pursue an action on Iran before January, when he knows he would not be able to do it.

Evidenced from the chatter last night on the boob-tube concerning the Iran threat (to Israel, not the US), I think the media and the various neo-con hotbed think-tanks (which i also monitor closely) are beginning to prepare, i.e indoctrinate, Americans for a possible action on Iran.

The real question is will Americans allow the wool to be pulled over their eyes once again, with a government and media and influential think-tanks recycling the same garbage arguments it used for invading Iraq? I hope the answer is no, but what do Americans do if the government decides to pursue military action with Iran anyway?

If there is an action in Iran, I renew my argument the real reason will be to maintain petro-dollar hegemony. Iran is very close to getting its oil bourse up and running, and even though Americans will see Israelis and neocons arguing for US action, to protect Israel, this is but one facet.

birth of iranian oil bourse = death of the us dollar

= another depression

= americans waking up to see the deceit that permeates US society

= 2nd american revolution

= principled government for a while

= another cycle of power-hungry people using citizens and soldiers in a grand game of chess

= back to where we are today



9 Responses to “It’s started already”

  1. Em Says:

    I don’t think that the idea of going head on with Iran is new. I’ve had conversations over 3 years ago with ex military now govt. contractors who swore that Iran is where the troops will be heading next. I think they and the military in the area have a better idea of the pulse of the middle east than any media outlet or politician. And I’d definately believe them before I’d believe the media or any politician.

    I also do not have any problems engaging Iran to ensure the stability of oil.

  2. scottie Says:

    The term “engaging” is interesting.

    The “engagement” is thought to be nukular in nature, including nukular bunker-busting bombs, LOL

    About the newness, it’s not new at all. The last post was hinting that the manufacture of public consent has started in full force.

    It is clear that Iran has been a target on the grand list, but if we go, Em, it’s not to ensure the stability of oil.

    In fact, “engaging” Iran will guarantee quite the opposite, oil as a weapon. Make no mistake, the US is pursuing Iran as a matter of Israeli security (that’s the above-board explanation) and to protect the dollar (the explanation that will be never offered to the people because it speaks volumes about the dollar, the Federal Reserve System and the power of the bankers), not to secure oil. If the bourse gets up and running, Chavez will follow suit, and if 2 of the 5 leading OPEC nations switch to a Euro-denominated oil trading mechanism, it will spell doom for the dollar eventually. I am not sure if Saudi Arabi will betray US interests as it has been the Saudis who have held true to their agreement with Nixon.

    Saddam tried it, and I read a very credible article that one of the first things we did in Iraq after Baghdad fell was switch the oil contracts from Euros back to dollars, further evidence backing the claim that Saddam was ousted , by way of deception here, because he sought to deal a blow to dollar hegemony.

  3. EM Says:

    You’ve got me…When I describe my son as being engaging, it has everything to do with “nukular bunker-busting bombs”.

    Oil already is a weapon, or there will always be the threat of it being a “weopon”. I still have no problem maintaining/protecting the stability of the dollar.

  4. JohnnyB Says:


    Pretty dire predictions bro. If the oil bourse is that bad maybe war is a good idea…

    I think you overestimate the power of exchanging from dollars to euro on the US economy. Earlier this year W was trying to reduces Chinese financing of our debt, essentially encouraging them to buy euros instead.

    Even if we have another “Great Depression” (highly unlikely), how likely is that to start a revolution? After all, the real great depression didn’t trigger a revolution.

    I don’t see much difference with regards to Netanyahu and Aminajehad: in terms of sabre rattling, they are both quite effective.

  5. scottie Says:

    Dire predictions …

    We will see, but I do not agree with your statement that if the bourse is that bad for the dollar and the US economy, then maybe war is a good idea.

    War should be the last resort.

    Maybe you should examine the cause ;

    why are we here in the first place where wars must be fought to protect our fiat currency?

    answering this question will inevitably take you back to 1913, the Federal Reserve Act, which has bankrupted this country, and enslaved its people.

    I am doing a bit of reading on the outlays of government. I learned something very interesting the other day. I’ll save it for a blog when I have a more complete picture, but the reason the dollar is worthless is due to the fractional reserve system, due to the bankers bypassing the Constitution, due to Nixon’s agreement to yank the US out of insolvency in 1971, and all because the dollar became worthless in less than 60 years.

    Who profits?
    Who suffers?

  6. JohnnyB Says:

    You may be able to tell that I think the oil bourse isn’t as much bad news as you say it will be. The recent election doesn’t indicate any willingness on the American public for more war. The democrats are wanting to pull out of Iraq pronto, I don’t see a lot of sabre rattling against Iran from America.

  7. scottie Says:

    check out this interview, Johnny B.

    if you think my prediction is still doomsday afterwards, let me know.

    i still think the US will do something soon in Iran.

  8. JohnnyB Says:

    Old Sy, eh? Even within the article he talks about Gates as a throwback to the old Bush 41 years. A return to realism seems to be running through the zeitgeist. Couple that with the lackluster performance by the administration to do something about North Korea despite their recent nuke test, and I’d say it looks like the neocon dream of spreading democracy around the world is over.

  9. scottie Says:

    stay on point dude …

    what was the focal point of the hersh article in the context of this blog?

    that an iran conlict is looming, and this guy is not the only one saying it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: