Could Obama’s apparent surrender to the Zionist lobby turn out to be good for justice and peace?

I’m quite strongly inclined to the view that the answer is “No”, but the question is still worth asking. It was triggered in my mind by a phrase in the introduction to the lead story of the BBC’s World Service (Radio) news bulletins late on 17 November and early the following morning. The story was the Obama’s administration’s “dismay” at Israel’s decision to approve 900 new homes in occupied Arab East Jerusalem “in defiance of world opinion“. The words emphasized were those of a BBC scriptwriter, not a spokesman for the Obama administration.

They reflected the fact that many if not most peoples of the nations of the world (so-called ordinary folk) are becoming increasingly fed up with Israel’s arrogance of power, its contempt for international law and its appalling self-righteousness and, also, are beginning to see the Zionist state for what it really is – the prime obstacle to peace, because of its preference for more and more land rather than peace.

Could it be that in the quietness of his unspoken mind, President Obama is counting on this growing anti-Israel sentiment, if and when it takes hold in America, to give him the freedom to respond to Netanyahu’s two-fingered gestures by taking on the Zionist lobby’s stooges in Congress?

Put another way, is it possible that Obama can live for the time being with the humiliation Netanyahu is heaping upon him because he believes that the Zionist state will so overplay its hand that it will alienate even Americans, enough of them to make it possible for him to do whatever is necessary to oblige Israel to be serious about peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could accept?

On this occasion, I’m not answering the question. Only asking it.

9 comments on this post.
  1. Sam Gonzales:

    Liked it? My cup of tea. Including Rep Cucinich’s masterpiece.

    Thanx for you all you do and keep-up your outstanding work.

  2. grace colombo:

    there is a need for more people like you, from here working hard as well. regards from Melbourne

  3. Mary:

    This just begs the next question: If so, can the Palestinians afford to wait? Some of us in the US are working so hard to bring about this change and will be working even harder. Amazingly (or not so amazingly, considering the lack of balanced news coverage in the US), many Americans don’t know the first thing about the situation in Israel/Palestine or its significance to the matter of world peace. The Israeli/Zionist version of events is predominant in the press, with so few voices speaking for Palestine. Unless an American actively pursues the matter by spending a fair amount of time on the internet and reading books by persons such as yourself, Ilan Pappe, Jonathan Cook, Norman Finklestein, and Robert Fisk, they will not have the whole story.

    I am still of the rather pessimistic opinion that Obama is another stooge of the Zionist lobby. I will never forget his 2008 speech before AIPAC where he swore undying fealty, nor will I forget his immediate condemnation of the Goldstone Report (before it was humanly possible to have even read it).

  4. Guy Fawkes:

    Mr. Hart,

    were you that naive to believe that this Affirmative-Action puppet had any good intention to do anything against Israel’s interests?

    Let me ask you one really dummy question, “Who installed this Liar-In-Chief into the White House?”. Obama is an Israel’s asset. Obama has been marketed and polished by Israel and their agents.

    You thought that they would have put someone who really wanted to work for America? Wake the #$%! up will you? Anyone wanted to work for America would have be killed or accidentially killed.

    Who killed President Kennedy and his brother? Who killed Wellstone, Bono?

    Who pulled 911?

    Your naiveness surprised me!

  5. Mary:

    Guy Fawkes, I think you have been drinking from the well of racism and paranoia.

    First off, your remark as to the “affirmative action puppet” reveals your true agenda and thereby removes any credibility from the rest of your statements. Mr. Obama’s heritage or skin color are not factors in the issue of US foreign policy or in anything else other than for those who frequent the likes of stormfront.org.

    The rest of your comment seems to come from the mind of a person who spends their days immersed in conspiracy theories. If you would care to research the donors who contributed to Obama’s campaign, you will see that they are nearly identical to those who also gave money to John McCain. When he, Obama and Hillary Clinton were competing for the White House in the spring of 2008, all three obediently and enthusiastically gave speeches at the annual AIPAC conference, no doubt in hopes of getting some nice big campaign contributions (which they probably got).

    You cannot simply blame the US government for what is happening in the middle east, although it is the major player. Nor can you blame Obama’s skin color. Mr. Hart is not naive by any means, but I think you just might be. I think Obama had good intentions going in, but because of his inexperience I doubt he had any idea of just how powerful the opposition forces would be. Like many people around the world, I was excited and encouraged by his Cairo speech, but I also knew that he was about to get into deep waters where he may not be able to swim. Obama wanted to be personally involved in the so-called peace process, yet he was sidelined by the economic crisis and had made the error of appointing Hillary Clinton as his SOS; she, too, is in over her head.

    I think the major players in this drama are going to be Netanyahu, possibly Barghouti (if he is released as part of the prisoner exchange deal for Gilad Shalit), Hamas (who seem to be inching closer to the negotiating table despite Israel’s intransigence), and most importantly, the people in this world who have been speaking with louder and louder voices for ending this occupation. I think the US has shown it will not be able to accomplish much simply because the US Congress is under the influence of the Zionist lobby.

  6. LenNZ:

    Im sorry Mart but IMHO Guy Fawkes is right. Obama in spite of knowing that Biden is an admitted zionist he chose him as his Vice President.

  7. Mary:

    I was offended by his racist remarks which have nothing to do with Joe Biden or anything else. President Obama’s racial heritage is irrelevant, and the term “affirmative action puppet” is repugnant to any intelligent person.

    Also nonsensical is the 9/11 Zionist conspiracy theory crap which he alluded to, along with the tired old Kennedy stuff. Can we keep this paranoid rubbish out of the discourse and deal with reality?

  8. LenNZ:

    Mary you seem to be as naive as anyone else if you believe the official story of 9/11. While I don’t know the full truth of 9/11
    I know it was impossible to have happened by two planes crashing into the twin towers. Also I believe the full truth of the J.F.K.
    assassination has never come out, and moreover probably never will.
    If my memory serves me correctly Obama also promised that Jerusalem would be the complete capital of the state of Israel. The zionists of Israel has never paid more than lip service to the cause of peace in palestine, and I sincerely believe they never will until
    the pressure of divestment, sanctions and boycott begin to really hurt them.

  9. Mary:

    With all due respect, sir, this is not the forum to discuss 9/11 or the underlying mysteries of it. There are many other places on the internet for people to do that, as well as hash over and over the assassination of JFK.

    In his AIPAC speech during his presidential campaign in 2008, Obama certainly did refer to a “united Jerusalem,” which sent the audience into an ecstatic roar. But I think I also recall him backpedaling on that, afterwards. Does anyone have any information on that?

Leave a comment