News the mainstream media "forgets" to talk about

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?" Gandhi

If you are looking for other information that is not provided in the blog post you just read or viewed ..chances are that the info you are looking for is in another post in the blogroll. please utilize our search this blog button..or contact the blogwriter directly by clicking on the name..that click will provide you with an email address..thank you for your support of Phoenix Rizing
Blog Admin-FaithRMichaels

Translate

Search This Blog

Featured Post

NO TRUMP! NO CLINTON! GET A NEW VIEW!

Written By FaithRMichaels I'm tired of hype, tired of same ole same ole lesser of two evils choice,  wayyyy tired of Clinton and wayyyy...

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Israel, its hypocrisy, 9/11 and the elephant in the room

Written By Nicholas DeVincenzo

One must acknowledge the suffering and the prejudicial treatment Jewish people have had to endure throughout history. They have every right to proclaim "never again" for the Holocaust was a true evil.

Although what I have to say here will be seen in some quarters as quite controversial, but in a free and open society I see no reason not to point out what I consider the hypocrisy that is synonymously imbedded within the creation of Israel itself. I say this because a people (the Palestinians) lost possession of the land they considered home in order for Israel to be created. It was the annihilation of one state of being, or way of life or existence to form another. What was once considered Palestine to the Palestinian people, became by a UN decree, Israel.







UN Resolution 181 was voted on in (1947) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine#The_vote and not one of what is now Israel's neighbors voted for the creation of Israel. It was a contested formula that could never work and insured a violent outcome. In other words it was within the womb of injustice and violence that Israel was given birth and with parents like questionably acquired lands, and the Holocaust, Israel had become the dysfunctional child of its time. Take the time to watch this video it is a very important perspective, it deconstructs some of the mythologies told by the modern Zionist Movement.

In favour Switched to in favour Abstained Against Absent

The Arab-Israeli war was a direct result of the rejection of the creation of the state of Israel by the people within the region. The words "Israel's war of liberation" do not have the same meaning to the Palestinian people as to those who support modern Zionism. "Palestine refugees are persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War."

The madness (Apartheid like State) that Israel has become is the direct result of the foundation of injustice that Israel has been built upon. Now it is the people of Palestine who suffer under the weight of Israeli oppression. They have become refugees within their former country, in quite simplistic terms, but never the less still very true, "two wrongs never made a right". Where will restorative justice be found when those who imposed their will on another people refuse to recognize their plight? The Palestinian people by the way had nothing to do with the Holocaust. The Jewish people who have been historically oppressed and persecuted have now become what they have feared and endured, herein lies the hypocrisy. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/



It is not the promised land that is in question here, but the way in which Israel was created. To myself and many others, including Jewish people, there was no justification for the displacement of the Palestinian people, no matter how deeply connected to "the land" many Jewish people feel. http://www.nkusa.org/


There is nothing wrong with a belief in the Promised Land, just as there is nothing wrong with the Christian belief in Christ or the second coming, or the Muslim belief in the Prophet Mohammad, just as long as those beliefs don't endanger or infringe on the rights or quality of the lives of other people. To me the most important thing about beliefs, be they religious or other wise, is not the belief itself, but rather what impact do they have? In other words are the consequences of said beliefs beneficial or detrimental, negative or positive to the overall condition of humanity and to life itself. (Mother Earth)

In my view what happened to the Palestinians is exactly what happened to the indigenous people of the Americas, which was the direct result of some of the European's/Colonialist's beliefs in Manifest Destiny. From this historical perch it makes sense why elements within both the Israeli and the US governments are in league with each other. They share a kinship of sorts in the creation of colonial nations both based on the notions of a chosen people, and divine exceptualism. One with military bases strategically located throughout the world, which requires a military budget that dwarfs all other nations. The other a completely aggressive militarized police state, that is starting to look like the worlds largest gated community.

It is Israel's special relationship (partnership) to the US that brings up more questions then answers. For instance why does Israel receive more aid from the US then any other country, why is it disproportionately influential over both political parties, through organizations like AIPAC? Why does the US turn a blind eye (nor even a mention) to Israel's not so secret, secret nuclear weapons program? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abqpoU6DR5w&feature=fvw

Much of the aid the US has given to Israel is/was used to purchase US made weapons, (which were used to bomb the people of Gaza http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Fact_Finding_Mission_on_the_Gaza_Conflict)

therefore feeding the military industrial complex here at home. For this reason one could conclude that conflict in the region is advantageous to those corporations and investment firms on wall street that profit from such things as arms sales, conflict and war. Hence, the and endless war on terror initiated by the terror attacks of 9/11(Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon Iran? Syria?) and national security concerns in this context would also be mutually advantageous to both Israeli and the US. On the one hand Israel's enemies are disposed of, and on the other, being in a state of perpetual war the US's military industrial homeland security complex becomes even more profitable. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1263093721952718155#


"Is it for Freedom" Sarah Thompson... Without the Pearl Harbor like events of September the eleventh 2001 the war on terror, which appears to be just a cover for a more nefarious agenda (Global Hegemony), would have to have been implemented in some other way. It is worth mentioning as an inescapable tie-in that our modern societies are built upon and around the consumption of oil, and it is no secret that the world's largest oil reserves are also in the region. It is also no secret that the US considers access to oil a national security concern. The plan for full spectrum dominance is still in play regardless of the election of president Obama. The invasion and occupation of Iraq removed Saddam who had nationalized his country's oil, which as the democratically elected president of Iran found out in 1953 is considered by western powers, to be a Bozo No No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d

Since oil is the life blood of modern societies control over the flow of it not only insures large profits, but also represents power itself. What compels me to write as I do, or perhaps be as obsessive about the truth surrounding 9/11, is the trail of dead bodies and the loss of our freedoms that the attacks on 9/11 has left in their wake. It wasn't, or currently it is not our freedoms that the so called terrorists hate, but rather the US's abuse of its power and unfair foreign policies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTbdnNgqfs8

Israel is the resented elephant in the room known as the Middle East, and is at the root of much of the Arab Street's contention, due to the way the US disproportionately favors Israel. Is it any wonder why the Israeli lobby is allowed to be so powerful of a player within the US, many purposes are served here. This entangled web of empire and militarism between Israel and the United States creates the conditions for war not peace. Profit and power are the driving forces behind all conflicts, and in all things concerning war, all you need to do is follow the money. Who profits, who pays, and of course and most importantly, who suffers and who dies? It is not that complicated or that difficult to comprehend, let following the money be your north star, or guiding light in the sea of empire and deception. Ideologies such as the spreading of democracy, religiosity and nationalism are merely masks put upon the faces of the greedy, and those who seek to profit, monopolize power and control others. True freedom will be found by the majority when these masters of manipulation and hidden agendas are unmasked. 9/11 truth is merely one aspect in the world of covert and false flag operations, the big picture as to who benefits must always be kept in mind, or it will be hard to recognize the forest of materialism through the trees of disinformation, and lies of omission. All the Dots are laid out here, one only needs to connect them where Israel is concerned... FORA.tv - The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy Firstly we as a movement (Warriors of a Good Heart) should be able to speak freely and responsibly about some of the obvious Israeli/Mossad tie-ins to 9/11,


without the fear of being called an Anti-Semite; while understanding the power and negative connotations that linguistically charged words like "Anti-Semitism" and "Conspiracy Theorists" purposely carry with them. They are designed to create controversy, end debates and inquires, deem legitimate questions and questioners illegitimate, and render credible people incredible. All brought to you by your friendly well funded perception management teams within the intelligence community, which the corporate mainstream media complicity regurgitates and disseminates. Secondly within the same context of 9/11 inquires, truth seeking and extrapolations we should understand that there are those who are truly racist and Anti-Semitic, so be aware and take heed not to be used by such characters, and or provocateurs. A red flag should go up every time someone says "the Jews did it", as well as when someone advocates or calls for violence. Thirdly please note that being Anti-Zionist and Anti-Semitic are two substantially different animals, although the latter will use the former, as stated above, if given half a chance. As well as, and more importantly will those who are trying to cover their asses, by linking one (Anti-Zionism) to the other (Anti-Semitism), and finally to (Conspiracy Theory). Be mindful of this as you make your case as to why calling for a New Investigation into 9/11 makes sense. As a result of the contrived linkages above, by simply mentioning Israel in the same breath as 9/11, you may find yourself battling charges of Anti-Semitism rather then entering into a discussion about the inconsistencies surrounding the attacks. The above formula unfortunately works quite well, as indeed it was designed to do, and I surmise this is the understanding and therefore the logic of some of us within the movement, who advocate for avoiding the subject of Israel altogether. The goal, or rather the condition of self censorship is also within the purview of those running psychological operations. Equating those who are asking questions about 9/11 with Anti-Semitism has been happening from day one, such as the rumor that was spread that all the Jews were warned not to go to work that day. I consider that rumor a preemptive strike, not unlike the idea that was espoused that the towers fell due to the melting of the steel, also a falsehood put out on day one. http://www.adl.org/anti_semitism/baraka_poem.asp

Again being labeled or somehow even being remotely associated with Anti-Semites is a very powerful club or tool to stop people from asking questions, or as I said earlier it can be used rather effectively to discredit the movement, and have otherwise intelligent people become afraid, as in not to be labeled Anti-Semitic, or as in the ultimate card used to induce self censorship, accusations of being a Holocaust denier. I don't pretend to know exactly what happened or exactly who pulled off the attacks of September the eleventh, I believe a thorough honest investigation could determine all the particulars. I once met a cop out of the Bronx who was a "9/11 truther" and I asked him how he came to believe as he did, he told me "deductive reasoning and common sense" sensible words indeed! If you forego using your common sense especially when dealing with some of the obvious divide and conquer technics, we will be reduced to calling each other names like gate-keepers or Anti-Semites, and fighting amongst ourselves instead of pragmatically making a case for a new investigation. A little bit of paranoia can be a good thing, (being mindful of agent provocateurs and gate keepers) but too much and it becomes self-destructive. What we all share and what we have in common is the belief that many things about September the eleventh 2001 just don't add up. As human beings we will simply not always agree, but know this, that things concerning Israel's involvement are legitimate, and it is frustrating not to be allowed to mention them. Just as within the peace movement some think it is taboo to mention 9/11 truth, and to many of you this is as equally frustrating. There are also tie-ins to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, saying this doesn't automatically make me or anyone else Anti-Arab, or relegate us to hating Muslims. Just as there are tie-ins inside the halls of power within the United States, neither does saying this make someone Anti-American or unpatriotic. On the contrary, each and every American Jewish or non Jewish should be asking the question Cui bono no matter where it leads, even if it leads back to Israel in some way. Almost as an aside, I realize that Israel is sacred to a lot of Jewish people, and they wouldn't want it to be hurt in anyway, but I feel I have a right in a free and open society to raise questions, about Israeli tie-ins to 9/11. To me the creation of Israel was a grave mistake and perhaps I naively wish it could be reversed mandated (as it was created) in some way, in order to set things right. Although it appears that many, although not all Israelis and their US counterparts, are psychologically dug in so deep and have become so war like, that before they would actually rethink Israel's creation, they would try to annihilate all of its perceived enemies. We would witness a violence that the world has yet to see.







I don't know what could bring justice to Holy Land or what would reverse the course of the war of attrition the modern Zionists are waging, (since the late 1800's). I simply do not know, but at the same time one would be foolish not the recognize the power or sway the Israeli lobby has over US foreign policy, and the harm that it has caused to the United States. It is only here where things get complicated, and convoluted, it is most certainly a matter of who's will is being imposed on whom, and for what reasons? As it was in the creation of Israel itself. Is it the US playing Israel or is Israel playing the US? Or perhaps what we have here is a precarious symbiotic relationship made in hell, that may one day lead humanity to its self destruction? I could not attempt to answer such question here, but all things in an open society should be brought to, or rather be allowed to be put on the table, like the legitimacy of Israel itself, or the real reasons the US is engaged in two wars/occupations.

Again Cui bono ("To whose benefit?", literally "as a benefit to whom?", a double dative construction) is a Latin adage that is used either to suggest a hidden motive or to indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears at first to be.

Israel definitely benefited from the attacks on 9/11/01, and given the history of Zionism it is well within reason to suspect Mossad involvement just as it is reasonable to suspect involvement by the CIA or the, MI5 or the ISI. "On the day of the 9/11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attacks would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was": "It's very good...Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)"

To tell you the truth I didn't even know what the word Zionist meant until April of 2005, I was already involved with the 9/11 truth movement for years, as early as December of 2001. I had a friend who pushed me to organize Rockland/Bergen 911/Truth. His name was Phil Greenspan and I consider him a mentor, he wrote a piece about Israel and I naively had asked him, is this true, did you check your facts? He could have been insulted, or gotten angry with me, but all he said was "that's what I want you to do, question everything, even me, go out and do your own research, see if what I said is true". What do you think I did? He since passed, and he is missed by all who knew him. Here is his article, the one of many I read. The one thing I could tell you for sure, Phil was an honest kindhearted man, but on the subject of Israel his writings now speak for him.

One must acknowledge the suffering and the prejudicial treatment Jewish people have had to endure. They have every right to proclaim "never again" for the Holocaust was a true evil, but no one tribe has the right to oppress another, nor does one individual, no matter what the reasons or justifications given, be they deemed proclamations of God or not. Never Again, Never Again, Never Again, it is time that such a valid cry against injustice be applied to all of God's children.

Notice the date... "We may soon face a threat more serious" how prophetic for a group that was fond of saying that "we create our own reality"...

January 26, 1998



The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC


Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.


Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.


Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.

We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.

We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zo
Article Related Links:

No comments:

Post a Comment