It’s now clear that the Republican frontrunner in the race for the White House is Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.
Officially the two Republican frontrunners are Newt “the Palestinians are an invented people” Gingrich and Mitt “Obama has pushed Israel under a bus” Romney.
Both are political whores locked in a competition of their own as well as with President Obama for Zionist lobby organized campaign funds and American Jewish votes. (In a very close election race the latter could determine who becomes president).
The probability is that Romney will emerge as the winner and be the one to take on Obama. So what Romney said in the last debate with the other Republican candidates is of critical importance. He said:
“If I was president I’d get on the ‘phone to Bibi and say ‘Would it help if I said this?’”
In other words, if Romney becomes president, Netanyahu will the one determining American foreign policy for Israel-Palestine.
Because of Obama’s first-term surrender to the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress there’s a case for saying that Netanyahu already is, effectively, the president of America so far as policy for Israel-Palestine is concerned.
So is there no prospect of next November’s election producing a president who will be prepared to put America’s own real interests first by confronting the Zionist monster?
If the Republicans get the key to the White House the answer will be “No”, because a first-term Republican president will not want to destroy his prospects for a second term by making an enemy of the Zionist lobby and its fundamentalist (deluded, even mad)) Christian partners.
But in my view there is a possibility that a second-term Obama might use the leverage all American presidents have to get a real peace process going, even if that means, as it would, challenging the Zionist lobby’s stooges in Congress to decide whether they are Americans first or not. (Those who are not could be condemned and prosecuted as traitors).
It’s not often that I find myself in agreement with anything written by the New York Times‘ op-ed columnist Thomas L. Friedman, but his latest piece under the headline Newt, Mitt, Bibi and Vladimir is a great contribution to the debate about what he calls the “grovelling” to the Zionist lobby of the Republican would-be presidents. (Friedman actually calls it the “Israel lobby”, but as I never tire of saying, that’s not an accurate description of the monster. Israel lobby implies that it speaks for all Israelis and it does not).
Here’s part of what he wrote about the would-be Republican presidents in their last debate.
“Newt Gingrich took the Republican competition to grovel for Jewish votes – by out loving Israel – to a new low by suggesting that the Palestinians are an ‘invented’ people and not a real nation entitled to a state.
“This was supposed to show that Newt loves Israel more than Mitt Romney, who only told the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom that he would move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem because ‘I don’t seek to take actions independent of what our allies think is best, and if Israel’s leaders thought that a move of that nature would be helpful to their efforts, then that’s something I’ll be inclined to do. … I don’t think America should play the role of the leader of the peace process. Instead, we should stand by our ally.’”
Friedman’s comment on that Romney contribution was:
“That’s right. America’s role is to just applaud whatever Israel does, serve as its A.T.M. and shut up. We have no interests of our own. And this guy’s running for president?”
Then Friedman considered the implications of Gingrich’s stated position.
“As for Newt, well, let’s see. If the 2.5 million West Bank Palestinians are not a real people entitled to their own state, that must mean Israel is entitled to permanently occupy the West Bank and that must mean – as far as Newt is concerned – that Israel’s choices are: (1) to permanently deprive the West Bank Palestinians of Israeli citizenship and put Israel on the road to apartheid; (2) to evict the West Bank Palestinians through ethnic cleansing and put Israel on the road to the International Criminal Court in the Hague; or (3) to treat the Palestinians in the West Bank as citizens, just like Israeli Arabs, and lay the foundation for Israel to become a bi-national state. And this is called being ‘pro-Israel‘?”
Friedman also had something to say about Netanyahu.
“I sure hope he understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.”
And about his own position and American Jews in general
Friedman wrote this:
“I’d never claim to speak for American Jews, but I’m certain there are many out there like me, who strongly believe in the right of the Jewish people to a state, who understand that Israel lives in a dangerous neighbourhood yet remains a democracy (for how much longer, I ask?) but who are deeply worried about where Israel is going today. My guess is we’re the minority when it comes to secular American Jews. We still care. Many other Jews are just drifting away.”
If many American Jews really are drifting away from support for Israel right or wrong, that could make taking on and defeating the Zionist lobby a more manageable proposition for a second-term President Obama.
Footnote
I am in the process of writing a considered piece with the headline The Zionization of American politics and how it could be terminated. It will be ready for publication at the start of the New Year.
If you liked this post, then...
- Share it with others using this button:
- Comment on it using the form below.
- Subscribe to my blog via email or RSS to get "new post" alerts.
- Follow me on Twitter (@alanauthor).
Possession of the presidency would just complete Israel's hold on the entire governmental system of the United States. It already holds majority control of the House and the Senate, where it gets full support from legislators who fear any gesture against Israel would cost them the massive campaign backing they get from Israeli money when they next run for office. Startling documentation of that fact can be seen in the book, "They Dare to Speak Out," by former GOP Congressman Paul Findley of Illinois. - George Beres
Alan Hart -I receive google alert notice of your postings because of the similarity of our names. Since yours is the shorter of the two, I suspect you are not informed of mine. I just read your latest and suspect we have some similarities in worldview. So I thought to contact you.
How painful that this Israeli/Palestinian conflict is continues to be such hotspot when it is such a small territory with relatively few people. But if we can solve the problem there we can solve it anywhere! I have always considered it to be a microcosm of the world's inability thus far to solve the "land problem" and to fairly share land and natural resources. Even with a two state solution, without solving the land problem internally, the wealth gap will grow, as it has already to extremes in Israel.
This is the kind of concern that I write about. My book - The Earth Belongs to Everyone - is recipient of the Radical Middle Book Award. The section on Economics of War and Peace describes key policy that could directly address and resolve the land problem for both Jews and Palestinians as well as everyone everywhere else.
The online course on Land Rights that I developed under contract with UN Habitat, now under my Earth Rights Institute, has nearly 700 enrolled from more than 90 countries. It is here: www.course.earthrights.net
Best always,
Alanna Hartzok
The Lobby demonstrates the abuse that follows from unfettered greed and unfettered campaign contributions. If money determines policy and government actions, then there is no democracy left in America.
The 99% ought to shake off the Zionists and their money and, at the same time, the corporations and their money. The 99% can still pull this off, but it may never get the opportunity again.
I look forward to guidance on chasing the Zionists out of America and back to Israel where, by their own admission, they belong. It is the homeland, after all. So, what are they doing here? Go home and leave the US to Americans without a confounding, often treacherous, loyalty to another country. Just get out. Just go home. The t shirt should be "Zionist? Go home!"
The changes brought by the so-called Arab-spring is that the meadle east is no longer managed by corrupted monarchs but by street poeples. In one or two years Israel and it's western corrupted lobby will see that but it would too late for them...
As long as the Lobby can buy and sell American policy, maybe we can get AIPAC and SWU to help with domestic issues. Where does AIPAC stand on jobs legislation, taxes, monetary policy? Let's exchange unbridled support for militarist Israel for support on jobs etc here. Realpolitik.
Owned lock, stock and barrel! And not even ashamed of it. It isn't the US Embassy that should be moved to Jerusalem...it is the White House!
Vera -- I don't disagree. Shameless toadyism, like my dog licking my face to get a treat. I am just always surprised that Americans, the 99%, have bought the Israel brand so completely. Poor little Israel in danger from big, bad (and non-Western) Arabs! Even Jews. The second you raise the tiniest question, and seek a truthful answer, the whole crummy enterprise loses all substance and you can see history and politics clearly like never before. It is just so simple. I am amused at myself now that I ever EVER thought that the ADL or Simon Weisenthal or Holocaust Museums were ever EVER dedicated and decent. It is such a ridiculous thought for me now! Jewish parochial schools in America take the students on a senior trip to -- can you guess? -- Poland and then to Israel. Poland is the premise and Israel is the conclusion. They are accompanied by Israeli (not American) Shin Beth for their "protection" but really to keep them from interacting with Poles. The Poles must resent that their country is shown off as the killing fields and nothing else. It is just incendiary stupid stuff. I know this first hand.
Alan; you are wrong. The front runner is Ron Paul. And that is because he will withdraw all troops and kick isreal to the curb. The question everyone is asking, is will he be assassinated? And if he is; there will be rebellion in the US.
"there is a possibility that a second-term Obama might use the leverage all American presidents have to get a real peace process going, even if that means, as it would, challenging the Zionist lobby’s stooges in Congress to decide whether they are Americans first or not. (Those who are not could be condemned and prosecuted as traitors)."
Seriously? Such an educated and intelligent man- yet still capable of such BLINDNESS. Why not use your clout to suggest REAL SOLUTIONS, and even, REAL CAUSES OF THE ZIONIST PROBLEM? How many members of Congress recently took a 'vacation' to Israel?- and how many signed an agreement of fidelity WITH ISRAEL? It's WAY too late to even imagine "prosecute as traitors". That should have happened after THE FACTS of Mossad operations causing 9/11/01 came to hidden fore-front. Zionism has controlled all since at least the Bolshevic Revolution. There are NO presidential candidates offered which wouldn't support zionism, including Ron Paul, whom Bibi just announced he endorses! If we the people do not wake up and act, we may as well just lay down and shut up. And that includes every member of the duped and paid for "press".
IMHO, Netanyahu doesn't need to be in the White House, on the public stage and lightened up. I think he is much more efficient in governing USA as he is doing now ...
Congressmen signed a fidelity pledge to Israel. Can you imagine the consequences if Congress had signed fidelity to, say, India? How can any congressman get re-elected once the voters know he has PLEDGED "FIDELITY" TO ANOTHER COUNTRY? It is mind boggling -- how could such a candidate succeed? And yet we all know he would parade his signing and Americans would buy it, that is, they would buy that Israel is actually part of the US.