1. Bill Narvey said:

The focus of anti-Semitism has been on Islamic nations, the Palestinians and the European nations and Russia, the birthplace of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the Russian Soviet cesspool from which so much Jew hatred was nourished, has been all but forgotten. It must not be.

It was the Soviet Union that backed the Arabs and the Palestinians. It is Russia that is enabling Tehran to carry out its threats against Israel.

Jew hatred continues to be very much a part of the Russian psyche. Unlike Zhirnovsky who is blatant and open about his Jew hatred, Putin and his minions are simply more sophisticated and so much better at masking their deep seated Jew/Israel hatred. The angry Jew hatred that moves Zhirnovsky is as much at work in Putin's thinking.

Unfortunately there is no good news in this when anti-semitism characterizes the psyche of the Arab nations, the Europeans, the Russians and the former nations of the Soviet Union.

Israel and Jews it appears have only America as a true friend.

2. Carlos Guillen said:

While Israel does not have anything that is of interest to the White House or their commercial Carlyle´s partners, USA will be its friend.

3. Dan Barkye said:

If Iraq's Osiris is any hint of the shape of things to come, then Iran's fate is sealed.

The big q is what is the real meaning of "Israel is within reach" and "It has no startegic depth"? Are Iran's long-range missiles operational, and, if yes, are they more effective than Sadam's at the time?

Further taking this q, does this mean that the Isr deterrent strike takes into consideration a loss of more than what was inflicted on her during GWI, in life and property (4k+ buildings ruined or damaged, mostly, and only one death, of a heart attack, IIRC)?

4. msjanket said:

So much conjecture, so little time. Putin appears to be a man of immensely short attention span. Why do lowlifes always end up with each other's company? Hidden deals on weapons and oil? It's simply amazing how commie countries and countries with high levels of illiteracy choose such methods of interaction. And this from a religion of peace, too...

5. Felix Quigley said:

Bill

You are really quite amazing

You go through all those countries, ie the whole world, as being antisemitic. And right you are, dead right! Then you come to the US...

In my book it is the US elite which is giving the lead to this Israel hatred. The US and EU, but with the US in lead, promote withdrawal from Gaza. Israel is attacked hourly. Poor forgotten Jews have no home. An area is Judenfrei.

The US in the lead promote this terror Palestinian state. All the time this is their agenda. Result. Is that not setting Israel up for a nuclear hit.

Where is the logic in saying "Israel and Jews it appears have only America as a true friend."

I am totally amazed. Where is the logic Bill?

6. georg von mecklenburg said:

Everything starts and ends with OIL. Iran has tons of oil. Assuming Israel can blow up these facilities and in the process destroy several of the oil fields or at least contaminate them, the price of oil will rise. The Bush administration would love nothing better than to see that happen. Look at the invasion of Iraq did to the price of oil worldwide.

The only way to buy off the Russians is to literally BUY them off. Russia is owed Billions of dollars from Saddam Hussein that will never be repaid unless Uncle Sam can come up with the money. So far, countries like France and Russia have been left out in the cold when came to repayment of previous debts. Pay them off and watch them disappear into the night.

7. M. Simon said:

Pay them off and they will only do more deals. Paying them off makes the deals risk free.

8. Bill Narvey said:

Felix,

Your comment seems influenced by Prof. F. Gill-White whose theory I disagree with.

I have already indicated I see greater merit in the analysis of Omri Ceren, but believe his analysis falls down as well because he limits his view to subtle entrenched bureaucratic and governmental or ruling elite thinking and ignores the significance of more immediate and pressing circumstances influencing how America establishes and implements policies in relation to its broad policies and perspectives.

I also do not ascribe the the theory that there is some kind of self perpetuating ruling elite, which is essentially anti-Semitic that dictates American policy.

To respond specifically to you, first, the meaning of true friend in everyday life does not hold the same meaning in the world of international politics.

In everyday life we make friends of those who are generally like minded so we usually do not find ourselves in situations where we are obliged to balance one friend's interests against anothers to decide whether we will stand by a friend through thick and thin on any particular issue. That is not the case in international relations and relationships.

After WWII, America recognized that indifference to the plight of the Jews, by it and other nations contributed to Hitler being able to carry his final solution for Jews as far as he did. Most of the Western nations felt the same sense of awareness and shame and guilt being so impressed on their consciences, allowed Israel to become a state.

After WWI and especially with the passing of Lord Balfour and the British State Department being headed by Lord Corzon, there was a shift in thinking that favored the Arabs and that situation worsened under Churchill. the land proposed to become Israel by 1947 was about half of the land originally intended to be a state for the Jews.

America, by 1947, like the European nations had developed many ties with the Arabs, not the least of which was oil. Still a sense of guilt over the holocaust led the West to vote for Partition and Israel came into existence.

The sense of guilt over the Jews that impressed itself on the conscience of the West, has over the years been evaporating, but much less so in America.

American foreign policy that seeks to protect and advance American interests has tried to strike a balance between unequivocal support for the existence of Israel and maintaining political and economic ties with the Arab world.

Sometimes American support of Israel seeks to move to a more pro-Israel stance, but more often America moves to a somewhat more pro-Arab/Palestinian stance. In either case, American policy does not stray very far from its core balanced policy.

Presidents Carter, Clinton and now Bush Jr. have become very invested in trying to bring about peace between the Palestinians and Israelis. While Russia was still one of the world's superpowers, America still was the one that took the lead in trying to bring about that peace and that lead has continued ever since.

Peace however has proved elusive for reasons you and I are familiar enough with that I needn't repeat them here.

The aforementioned Presidents however not only invested their political capital in trying to broker a peace agreement, but they became emotionally invested to see their efforts through to fruition and doubtless became intoxicated with the dream that their favorable place in history would be assured if they could achieve peace between Israel and Palestinians.

That great investment in the peace process in my view is one of the influences that causes America to pressure Israel and look the other other way at Palestinian failings and breaches of agreement, somehow maintaining the belief that they are not pushing Israel towards its demise and that Palestinians will eventually come around.

Another factor that augers well for Israel is that whereas Western and Eastern European nations have moved to eliminating religion as an influence in politics, religion and the the Judeo-Christian values and morals are more recognized in the formulation and implementation of American policies.

Europeans are more dependent on the world oil based economy than America and of course derive great benefit therefrom which they gained and seek to hold onto, but the quid pro quo for the EU is support for the Arabs and Palestinians. European anti-semitism has also influenced their policies vis a vis Israel.

The Bush administration, like former administrations seek alliances to further American interests globally and that includes support for their war on radical Isalm, war in Iraq and their taking the lead in pushing peace on the Israelis and Palestinians. The Bush administration shortly after it found itself in the Iraq quagmire, faced considerable criticism at home, much of it underserved that Bush had alienated America's traditional allies.

With Bush's approval ratings tumbling at home, the Bush administration has sought to restore its ties with the EU and the support it gets for its policies, but has pursued that goal by accomodation and appeasement of the EU that is decidedly anti-Israel and anti-American.

These are some of the factors that muddy the waters of American support for Israel.

One has to however be mindful of the fact that but for American munitions support and supply, economic support through loan guarantees and the like and American's staunch support of Israel at the U.N. regarding the countless politicized anti-Israel resolutions brought forward, without which Israel probably would not have survived to this day.

It is in this context Felix of America being the one most steadfast in its support of Israel that I described America as Israel's one true friend.

If you are still "amazed" at my thinking, we will just have to agree to disagree on my view that in spite of all the warts and wrinkles I too condemn in American foreign policy vis a vis Israel, on the whole, I still see America as Israel's true friend.

9. Patrick said:

http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/

See my blog for the column "Don't Worry About Iran", which answers Timmerman's column.

Israel will never attack Iran. It won't have to.
If Iran is foolish enough to openly continue their quest for nuclear weapons,
USA - WITH UN AND INTERNATIONAL APPROVAL - will take it out. Sometime in 2007 or 2008.
Or early 2009 (before jan 20th, he he he).

10. Moazzem Hossain said:

Can Iran really retaliate against an Israeli attack on its nuclear sites?I guess a negative answer to it.As Saddam shouted aloud before the Iraqi invasion by USA,so is what Iran is doing this time also.But I strongly believe that Israel would be unable to contain the overall situation in the Middle East if it, genuinly,decides to bomb Iran unilaterally.Always remember that a mistake begets another mistake which has more gravity than the earlier one.Whatever may be the case,I want peace to prevail at the end. Peace, peace and peace should always dominate over any talks on Middle East.

11. felixquigley said:

Bill

You make a very big mistake indeed. You tend to lump together the ordinary American man or woman with the government which rules over them. The democracy election thing in America is really a fraud. I will try to place my thoughts down on paper below.

12. felixquigley said:

Time to reach some conclusion

The problem that is being all the time repeated here is to lump the American people along with their reactionary and anti-Israel rulers. This mix-up now becomes very critical and dangerous.

I maintain that a new Holocaust is being prepared against the Jews. In every century there has been a genocide against Jews and early in this century all the signs are there once again.

The PLO which is the creation of the US elite has vowed in its constitution to wipe Israel off the map. Granted Gaza it does not even pause for a day but begins the attack in earnest on Israel through suicide bombers and through missile attack.

A year ago the Prime Minister of Malaysia was cheered to the rafters in his anti-semitic attack on Jews by the leaders of every world Islamic state. The latest evidence of genocidal intent is from Iran.

At first the EU countries led by Britain and Robin Cook maintained the need to talk peacefully to Iran. The US Government of Bush went along with that.

In the Iraq war the US Government has been aiding and siding with the enemies of Israel when it supports the Al - Sadr militias linked directly to Iran. All the time the Iranians continue to build their nuclear facility.

In the elections to the Palestinian Authority Bush and Rice are supporting Hamas, the organisation which is determined on Jewish genocide.

The Israeli Establishment just as happened in the 1930s are helping the fascists who seek to liquidate the Jews. So from his prison the Jew murderer Barghouti is openly directing an election campaign. They open the door to their own genocide. Why is Barghouti able to carry on his genocide planning from prison.

The Israeli establishment which includes all parties and even including Likud was implicated in handing Gaza across to its mortal enemy.

The whole machinery of the Israeli state is implicated in setting up the Jews for genocide. The evidence which was put forward by the authors of Boomerang should have led to the immediate arrest of Sharon and his sons and preparations for their trial. This would have had the effect of putting an immediate end to the withdrawal and evacuation of Gaza and its handing to the enemy. Due to Sharon and the US elite the place is now flooded with arms, Al Qaeda has now got cells in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria. Dangers of genocide and nuclear strike which can go hand in hand are far closer.

On the issue of Gaza surrender to the enemy Israpundit was hopelessly split and powerless. When Sharon visited the US he was cheered to the rafters along with Rice by the American Jewish establishment. All were behind Bush and the handing of Gaza across to the enemy.

Even now Sharon is being lauded to the skies by the Jewish establishment in both Israel and internationally. In reality his politics have led Jews much closer to genocide.

When I turn to the organisation which Ted recommends, the ZOA, for a lead in this situation I see 2 things. Firstly complete endorsement of Sharon, and more especially of Ohlmert.

“The P.M. has been a great and distinguished fighter for Israel in all its wars. He was also wounded in battle. He was and is a great proponent of Aliyah and always expressed his great love for Jerusalem to remain the undivided sovereign capitol of the Jewish State of Israel.

“I have known Prime Minister Sharon for over a decade and always marvelled at his boundless energy, strength and stamina. I was also honored and privileged to have frequently been called upon to personally introduce him to the audience of Jewish leaders at the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations annual trip to Israel.

“We also wish the best of luck to Acting Prime Minister Ehud Ohlmert, with whom we’ve always had a warm and close relationship. We pray that with the help of almighty G-d, Mr. Ohlmert will be successful in fulfilling his new awesome responsibilities while P.M. Sharon is incapacitated.”
(http://www.zoa.org/pressrel2006/20060105a.htm)

The problem that I have with this is not that it properly shows sympathy for a sick leader, but that it actually disarms the Jewish people and gentiles like me who may look for a lead from ZOA.

The new Kadima party with or without Sharon is a most dangerous entity because it seeks to disarm Jews in the face of planned genocide. In that case why then is Bush supporting it and waging propaganda war on those who oppose Kadima.

But in the above knowing what we do about Ohlmert why is the ZOA not doing everything in its power to warn. Instead it prays for his success.

When I use their search and look at their first article on Gaza I find an article which opposes Gaza withdrawal but is not in any point critical of the US Government and its role in the withdrawal.

So I quote a fair size from it to show my point:

“It is bewildering to hear Israeli Prime Minister Sharon telling us not to worry because Egyptian troops will come into Gaza to protect Israelis after the retreat. This makes no sense. For years, Egypt has been facilitating the smuggling of arms and explosives from Egypt into Gaza. It is beyond the pale of reason to believe that Egypt will suddenly stop these massive smuggling operations after all Israelis have left Gaza.

Indeed, General Uzi Dekel, the director of Strategic Planning in the Israel Defense Forces, has disclosed that Egypt and the Palestinian Authority "refuse even verbally to accept responsibility for fighting terrorism" once the retreat is over. And a new 83-page U.S. report in coordination with General William Ward, the U.S. coordinator to overhaul the Palestinian Authority (PA) security apparatus, found that the PA security force is divided, weak, and badly motivated, making it clear that after Israel leaves, the PA has neither the will nor capability to fight Palestinian Arab terror, stop the smuggling or the mortars and missile”.
(http://www.zoa.org/oped/oped20050801a.htm)

Now I notice that ZOA is right on the money as far as Egypt is concerned. But then ZOA brings in Ward and he basically says that withdrawal is a trap, and will create untold dangers to Jews.

According to Ward NO “capability to fight Palestinian Arab terror, stop the smuggling or the mortars and missile”.

That is from Ward, the right hand man of Bush in the area. Yet Bush and Rice were the main ones internationally responsible for pushing this through. Yet ZOA does not issue one word of condemnation for Bush in this article. And Ward even as he was very aware of the future and what a trap he was creating was doing everything in his power to make the Jews surrender this vital strategic area to the enemy terrorists. ZOA lets it all pass and the question is two-fold. One why? Two why did Ted recommend this organization to his readers on Israpundit.

As far as I can see what you have in this “respected” organisation at least is an awfully friendly attitude to the US elite.

I now turn to quote from an Israpundit reader, a lady called Debbie, and she wrote this very revealing comment. She said that she always believed that the US was the friend of Israel and that as a Christian she had believed that the land of Israel had been given to the Jews by God. So why the criticism, Debbie asked, of the US.

“I have been checking in with Israpundit for a while now, reading some of the posts and comments. In this post I feel very uneasy by some of the comments about America. I am not Jewish or Arab, but Christian American. I have believed all my life that Israel is God's chosen people and that the land belongs to Israel. Everyone I know believes this and I also think that most Americans believe this. Also I have always believed that Israel had no better friend than America and America had no better friend than Israel.
In these comments I feel a lot of anger/dislike/whatever toward the US and I fail to understand why. I am not a student of history and by no means claim to be well informed on the politics in this this situation. Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to the reason for the anger toward America. As far as I know, the Presidents in my life time have all tried to help Israel. Haven't they? Thank you
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/2006/01/ends_and_means_1.php#more
What that comment showed is that the wool has been well and truly pulled over the eyes of the American people on this issue. The history has been well and truly hidden.

Now when a person like Francisco brings forward the awkward facts of this history about 80 per cent of the contributors of Israpundit give Francisco one mighty shove aside calling him a conspiracist.

Speaking of Sharon. One thing he did do was rightfully take the war against the PLO terrorists into Lebanon, and believe it or not had the PLO almost wiped out. Who was it that rescued the PLO out of Lebanon, installed them in Tunis, and a little later brought them back into the heart of Israel. It was indeed the American elite.

Debbie needs to know these things, and as the dangers of genocide grow and multiply, needs to know very quickly indeed.

The mistake is fatal, and is continually being repeated, the error being to lump the American people along with its ruling elite. I would not dream of doing that for a second in my own country of Ireland, where I always separate the various leaders from the people. Why then do it in the case of the US!

13. Bill Narvey said:

Felix,

With all due respect, you have not at all addressed the point I made.

You state that I have mistakenly lumped together American government with the American people, but that is neither what I did say nor do I understand how in your saying that, that you are addressing my point.

You have instead moved the discussion to your assertion that the world is preparing to commit genocide against Israel and not only is America part of that, but so too is Israel.

You assert that the world is readying itself in some kind of vast implicit conspiracy to commit genocide against Israel. I do not agree.

There are doubtless many Arab nations who still dream of a world without Israel and have worked to make that happen. There some nations who either support or just give a green light to those Arab nations. There are some nations that think if Israel ceased to exist that would solve the world's problems. There are also some nations that just do not give a damn about whether Israel continues to exist or not.

Such notions are held in varying degrees by most of the nations of the world.

I do not however see that there is some underlying conspiracy amongst all nations to see to it that Israel is destroyed in one final genocidal cataclysm and that they all plan to execute or facilitate such actions A.S.A.P.

You have however gone further to accuse the leaders of Israel as being complicit in this genocidal view. However justified you may be in your assessment of Israeli policies and actions, it is a quantum leap to the unimaginable that Israeli leadership is complicit in a genocidal plan some nations have conspired to put into effect.

Though I and as you put it 80% of the posters to this forum have disagreed with Prof. Gill-White's conspiracy theories, is evidence that his theory is unlikely realistic, but is not evidence that his theory is in fact untrue.

Felix, rather than shift the focus of the discussion away from the point I made towards your own theories of a world preparing to commit genocide on Israel, I invite you to deal specifically and directly with the point I made.