1)
aletheia · 8 weeks ago
Background (surely known to some, sadly not to most): Consider means, motive, and opportunity + modus operandi, presence & premeditation & cui bono?
means: Meir, ~$US50mio for arms
motive: Herzl, Zionism
opportunity: Balfour, Holocaust, UNGA181 (text: "an area ... shall be evacuated" - which *no* power on this planet may so order)
modus operandi: Jabotinsky = "Iron Wall" = perpetual aggressive war = murdering violence
presence: before Herzl little, then immigration, partly illegal = alien invasion
premeditation: latest 1897, 1st Z-conference Basel
cui bono? only Zs; US helps, partly against own interests
proof; Ben-Gurion(1936-39): “We must see the situation for what it is. ... But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, ..."
proof, terrorism: King David Hotel bombing
proof, ethnic cleansing: Plan Dalet, ~700,000 forced from homes
proof, genocidal methods: Deir Yassin & etc., Gaza '08/9, continues
observation: erstwhile legal owner/occupiers displaced by violence
observation: Israel squats on improperly alienated land/property
observation: a war between recent immigrants and long-time natives is neither a 'civil' war, nor of 'independence’ - see next
summary: fits description of "supreme international crime"
further;
UNGA181 specified Palestinian state, still none.
UNGA194 specified Palestinian right of return, still out.
UNGA273 cites 181 & 194, *accepted* by Israel, *still* not honoured
UNSC242 inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war
Q: What is wrong with this picture?
Q: Why does the world tolerate it?
Q: What if anything am I missing?
Compare to a burglary/home invasion with deadly violence; SWAT teams are sent in, the perpetrators brought to justice and all stolen property revests, with reparations paid by those found guilty. Why are we waiting?
2)
aletheia · 8 weeks ago
It's not what they say (so much) as what they do. 'Normally' I would not even open an article containing such 'baby-names' as this one does, but I was 'hooked' by the possibility that not only had Obama engaged Netanyahu, but had 'pulled a swifty' - and bested not just Netanyahu but, since the two are one, Obama had bested the whole of the I/J/Z-plex to boot; the proposition seems preposterous on its face.
1st, 'baby-names' as an example of *enemy* language; Lakoff says that IF you use their language or special terms, here a totally unwarranted familiarity, THEN you enter the enemy's frame, at great if not fatal disadvantage to yourself.
2ndly, getting Netanyahu to apologise and agree to reparations definitely is a step in the correct direction (it's *part* of what's required vis-à-vis the ethnically cleansed erstwhile legal owner/occupiers of Palestine, the main part being the revesting of all stolen land/property, best by exiting the region), but any 'victory' here is minor-to-none, since:
3rdly, as some/many/most may know, the road to Teheran *allegedly* passes through Damascus. TR is in NATO, it is conduiting arms and (Al-Qaeda!) mercenaries into Syria, the (mostly?) Serbian[*] arms are being financed by Saudi Arabia, and *Qatar*; here a comment from elsewhere on ICH:
"The agreement, signed last year, between Iran, Iraq, and Syria, to build a gas pipeline, with terminal on the Syrian coast, evoked an absolute hissy fit in Qatar, in that the IIS gas pipeline plan would render obsolete its own gas-line project with Turkey and the EU. Hence Qatar's eager and active participation in the destruction of Syria."
Sooo, finally, geopolitics rears its ugly head (again? No, still), as a continuation of some 'great game,' not in itself a game but rather more of the same-old-same-old, namely mass-murder for spoil. Surprise! And this x-spy walks all around it, apparently not noticing? On the whole quite telling, really. TR gets this mention, possibly designed to cause outrage somewhere:
"... that Turkey is an actual ally and critical to American regional interests while Israel is not, though it was likely expressed more diplomatically than that." Conclusion: A Giraldi psyop.
@peacenik: "And why do Americans apparently accept this crazy state of affairs?"
A: Because ~315mio US citizens have as good as *no* influence, only the <1% + the I/J/Z-plex not already in that <1%.
[*] ooops) antiwar,Apologies; Serbs, the new matériel is Croatian.txt
3)
aletheia · 8 weeks ago
The psyop; it always pays to ask cui bono? Intro: Consider the concept of "Airstrip One." a) What would become today's I/J/Z-plex wanted an homeland to escape widespread persecution (one has to ask "Why?" - as in why were they persecuted = what did they do to attract same?) - and b) 1st England, then America wanted oil. Not 'just' oil, note, but control over oil (to exclude perceived 'competitors' like currently R&C, say), and 'vertical integration' of the oil business, to be masters of oil from the sand to the sales-point = 'harvesting' as much of the economic rent that they could get, neglecting any/almost all claims by sovereign owners to same. Proof = open your eyes and look.
But criminals can't afford to be too obvious, and will always work behind a screen of (planned, hoped) deception. It is known that IL wants to expand beyond all reason; the original partition was never enough (one blogger repeatedly raves: "Up to the Litani River!") - specifically here, they want the Golan Heights and more, they *always* want to attack - and slaughter - any/all perceived 'enemies,' up to and including Iran. All should know this by now; proof = again, open your eyes and look.
Since the ME oil-sands mostly lie under Arab/Muslims, they become the US, UK & IL's 'natural' enemies (makes it tough to be an Arab/Muslim, no matter how innocent). But by the 'hiding behind lies' rule, it's hard for the US, UK &/ IL to attack directly - far too obvious, especially after the utterly disastrous Iraq imbroglio. So they need a proxy; what *better* than deranged religious jihadi nuts of Al-Qaeda, to attack and slaughter "their own people?" Same proof.
Argument: But IL made another of their frequent errors; they attacked the Turkish flagged ship Mavi Marmara, the IDF brutally killing peace advocates, as is their wont. This caused a rift with TR, interrupting cooperation in various nefarious shared activities. Q: How to repair the rift? A: Put it on Obama, blame it on Obama, give the I/J/Z-plex a little frisson of fear: Could Obama really dare defy us? Obama is, after all, disposable? Just as long as the US-M/I/C/$4a†-plex keeps supporting IL and the 'free' (to IL) guns and $s keep arriving in IL, all is well - for IL (after all, who could be more important?) This too, the 'smear' on Obama, will pass; partly thanks to this article - or so the author may hope. But the main work has been done; IL off the TR-hook and may now use the people/arms-pipeline through TR to help smash Syria, not caring, as all the other attackers by proxy don't, how many innocent Syrians get slaughtered in the process, nor how much damage is done to infrastructure; main chance is the joint US/Zs' geopolitical objectives of land- and oil-grabs.
3a)
aletheia · 8 weeks ago
Not so much BTW, the quote on the IIS was from loefingstonn on ICH 34426.[end to come]
No comments:
Post a Comment