Online Journal
Front Page 
 Special Reports
 News Media
 Elections & Voting
 Social Security
 Editors' Blog
 Reclaiming America
 The Splendid Failure of Occupation
 The Lighter Side
 The Mailbag
 Online Journal Stores
 Official Merchandise
 Join Mailing List

Analysis Last Updated: Jun 10th, 2008 - 00:44:13

A million questions with one answer
By Peter Chamberlin
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jun 10, 2008, 00:12

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

According to the US State Department, there are approximately a dozen separate anti-Semitic beliefs, the worst of which is the claim that wealthy Jewish-Americans economically control the government, the media, international business or finance.

The other most serious intolerable anti-Semitic claim is that the brutal Israeli repression of the Palestinians is comparable to the fascist tactics that were employed by the Nazis against another Semitic people in Europe.

If anti-Semitism is the spreading of lies about Semitic peoples, and both of these "canards" are proven to be true, then it is the government that is spreading the lies about its ally Israel.

If there is no truth to the charge that Israel is driving America to war against Iran (just as it drove our power-mad leaders to destroy Iraq), then why is it that the craziest American ideas for committing acts of war against Iran (embargoes, blockades and denying Iran the use of its own airspace) all originate in Israel? If most Americans are overwhelmingly against expanding the current limited wars into a regional conflagration, then what explains the bipartisanship in Congress for these small-scale military steps which are clearly intended to cause a major escalation with Iran?

The American majority knows that opening a new war front in Iran would be a major defeat for American forces, having three intolerable consequences: forcing a return of the draft, the devastation of what is left of the American economy and the use of nuclear weapons against civilian populations. The Israeli majority knows this as well, and they are perfectly willing to force their American ally into paying this price for them. Some ally!

If American politicians are not subservient to Israeli interests through the lobby group AIPAC and the financial largesse which they dispense, then how do you explain congressional pursuit of a global war that is desired only by the small vocal Jewish-American minority and their Christian-Zionist supporters (which cannot benefit any nation other than Israel), even though world war is the direct opposite of the clearly expressed will of the majority?

Why have these same politicians supported every Israeli effort to deny the most basic human rights to Palestinians and many other Arabs? Why has Congress supported the suppression of testimony about these victims of Israeli aggression and the violation of countless international laws against the ethnic cleansing committed by Israeli troops while colonizing Palestinian land? Why is there bipartisan support for empowering Israel's attempts to act as vigilante enforcer of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, even though Israel continues to spurn international inspections of its Dimona facility, where Mordechai Vanunu took his infamous secret photos which proved that Israel has illegally violated every international atomic treaty in secretly building hundreds of nuclear weapons?

No other nation in the world can flaunt international law and receive undiminished US support for its continued lawbreaking and the brutal, merciless, fascist-like repression of a victim population the way Israel does. Why does the purported international champion of human rights and the alleged defender of the weak support the criminal abuse of a helpless minority in Palestine and in no other nation?

What is the root of this sentiment, that America must insulate Israel from the consequences of its own actions, even if it is fatal to our republic? Why does this bipartisan commitment to bring war upon the United States permeate both chambers of Congress, where it is echoed by Democrats and Republicans alike? Conspiring with agents of a foreign power to bring war upon the United States matches two of the three definitions of treason given by

  1. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
  2. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

Are we witnessing a perverse Congress that has succumbed to blackmail, or have they merely sold America out for the sake of power and wealth? It does not matter whether Bush and Co. are puppets or parrots for the powerful Jewish-American interests who are driving the war on terror, the fact remains that in this war, Israeli government officials are pulling the strings. Ehud Olmert may as well be calling in the American air strikes himself, as we target the countries which they have named for elimination in the "Clean Break" document, which is nothing more than an updated Zionist version of "Mein Kampf."

American military forces are carrying-out the Zionist "blitzkrieg" against Israel's Arab neighbors, decimating any military forces which could resist the planned Israeli aggression, turning entire nations into refugee populations, conducting a genocidal war of ethnic cleansing on behalf of "God's Chosen People." If modern Israelis were indeed "the Chosen," then there would be no conflict there now, as well as no "Diaspora," since all real Jews would be drawn irresistibly back to the Holy Land. But the Zionist imposters who are waging war against the world are watching their stolen dream collapse around them, as worries about Israeli militancy, water shortages and the comforts of assimilation bring about a negative growth rate, where more people leave Israel than "return" there.

The criminal regime in Tel Aviv is doing everything it can to expand America's terror war, which is seen as Israel's sole existential hope. Mossad agents are working overtime to avoid the inevitable collapse of the racist Zionist vision, as they try every conceivable deception to activate some version of its "Samson option," bringing the rest of the world down around itself and sacrificing the US to empower itself.

Bush, Cheney and nearly the entire Congress are committed to ending the Iranian regime, whatever the costs, before the new president takes office. On June 4, Bush issued a memo to the secretary of state: "I hereby determine that it is necessary, in order to protect the national security interests of the United States, to suspend for a period of six months . . . the process of moving our embassy to Jerusalem."

Moving our embassy would be placing our seal of approval upon an Israeli annexation of Islam's second most holy city, after Mecca. This means that Bush is delaying the implementation of one of the most controversial decisions that any US president has ever made, until after the November 4 United States presidential election, to protect the "national security interests of the United States" (knowing what the effects upon the entire Muslim world will be). Some have interpreted this as Bush's way of bolstering McCain, who also wants to move our embassy, by avoiding compounding Israeli complications for him. This may be part of his motivation for the delay, but knowing the warped reasoning of the current administration, I take this to mean that the drastic actions which Bush plans to take on Israel's behalf at that time will dwarf present concerns about angry Muslim reactions to an embassy move.

Bush's embassy move memo was released while Olmert was meeting with him, trying to persuade him to substitute Israel's own intelligence estimate on Iran's nuclear program for the official US National Intelligence Estimate, which is a product of 16 American agencies. Olmert was in town to attend the AIPAC conference, where he told the audience point blank, why America must wipe Iran from the face of the earth, in order to satisfy Israeli designs for dominating the Middle East: "Iran's fingerprints are evident in almost every terrorist organization across the Middle East, from Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip to Hizballah in Lebanon . . . [equating the three Islamic resistance groups that oppose Israeli hegemony as "almost every terrorist"].

"The Iranian threat must be stopped by all possible means. International economic and political sanctions on Iran, as crucial as they may be, are only an initial step, and must be dramatically increased . . . urgent need for more drastic and robust measures.

"Sanctions can be imposed on the export of gasoline to Iran . . . [following his previous calls for a naval blockade and declaring Iranian and Syrian air space as "no fly zones"] . . . Israel will not tolerate the possibility of a nuclear Iran."

Christian Americans must ask themselves, "If America does not neutralize Iran at Israel's command, then is America failing God, or is it merely refusing to commit another criminal act for a criminal regime?"

Does America even have a choice in the matter anymore?

To contact Peter Chambelin, click here.

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

Top of Page

Latest Headlines
The black days of 1948
Why oil prices are so high
Credit Default Swaps the next crisis -- subprime is just a �Vorspeise�
A million questions with one answer
Zionist terror 1946 to 2001
Heart of darkness: Princess Patricia and a Taliban takeover
Poisonous plutocracy pushes economic inequality
In Afghanistan, US opens the door to opium for the masses (second of a two-part series)
The US is repeating the Soviets� mistakes in Afghanistan, plus showing remarkable creativity in the horrors department (first of a two-part series)
The great oil swindle: How much did the Fed really know?
More on the real reason behind high oil prices
The conservative movement has become the biggest threat to the US Constitution
There is more than meets the eye about the world food crisis
There appear to be no winners in Serbia�s recent elections
Abusing Iran prior to and after WW II
Lebanon�s sleeping giant
What to watch in Wednesday's consumer price data
Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Lies are truth
US terrorism report: Selective data, wrong lessons
Gorbachev number two: Dmitry Medvedev; the West should get ready for a new transition period in Russia