|
US
and UK Set Israel Up for Media Attack and NATO-Type Intervention
[22 July 2006] For a list of Emperor's Clothes
articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict, the problem of antisemitism, and related
issues, go to =============================================== We have been misinformed, to put it gently. While claiming to support Israel's right to defend itself from Hezbollah and Hamas attacks, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have in fact mis-described the current Middle East war in a way that sets Israel up for media demonization, while creating public support for a "robust" (Kofi Annan's word) international intervention in southern Lebanon, an intervention that would, of necessity, constitute a serious and possibly deadly threat to Israel. (Regarding the implications of a NATO-type intervention, see footnote [1] ) In a defining press conference held 16 July at the site of the G8 meeting, President Bush said:
Blair elaborated:
Aside from Blair's assumption, that there is a Palestinian leadership that accepts the existence of Israel, an assumption I will challenge when I discuss Hamas, notice that both leaders focus on Syria and Iran as the root cause of the fighting in Israel/Lebanon. At the same time, both leaders stress that the Lebanese government is not part of the problem, but a victim of Iran and Syria, which "want to disrupt the positions in Lebanon." Regarding the extent to which they focus on Syria and Iran, I counted the number of times Bush and Blair used various words in answering reporters' questions. I found that they used 'Lebanon' or 'Lebanese' seven times. But they used 'Syria,' 'Syrian,' 'Iran' and 'Iranian' a combined total of 13 times. So, in a war where Israel is hitting targets in Lebanon, their main focus is Syria and Iran. What is the sub-text here? That Syria and Iran, not Lebanon, should be Israel's targets. And that weak - and innocent! - Lebanon should not be its target. The same idea, that Syria, or Syria and Iran, are the guilty parties, but not Lebanon, which, perhaps even more than Israel, is presented as a victim of Hezbollah, is implicit in Condoleeza Rice's July 21 statement as reported by Associated Press. Portraying Hezbollah as an attack dog, Rice named Syria as the Master:
And concerning the Lebanese government:
Although in a limited sense these and other statements by Bush, Blair and Condoleezza Rice support Israel - that is, they blame Hezbollah for provoking the fighting and affirm Israel's right of self-defense - the way they have defended Israel has set Israel up for the massive media demonization that followed. Why? Because, first, they present themselves as the strongest supporters of Israel; therefore what they say is taken by ordinary people as the limit of possible defense of the Israeli position. Second, they do not deal with the character of Hezbollah. Third, and perhaps most important, since they say that Syria and Iran, not Lebanon, are the villains, and therefore, by obvious implication, the proper targets of Israeli retaliation, with the Lebanese government not only an innocent bystander but a victim of Hezbollah, it follows that Israel is going way overboard in its counterattacks. Bush and Blair have not said this - yet - but it is implicit in their 'faint praise' of Israel, and this implication has been brought out by the media. Thus, in presenting Condoleezza's Rice's views, the AP writes: "The crisis started last week when Hezbollah, an Islamic militant group ["which is supported by both Syria and Iran"- AP] that operates in southern Lebanon, captured two Israeli soldiers. Israel retaliated by carrying out bombing across Lebanon and slapping a naval blockade on the country. Hezbollah fired hundreds of missiles into Israel." And:
What is suggested in the AP dispatch is that Israel has turned a relatively minor fight with some 'militants' holed up in the southern part of Lebanon into an all out nationwide attack against the wrong sovereign state (and, moreover, a struggling embryonic, democratic state). This is put forward aggressively by most of the world media. Case in point: as we will see, Steven Erlanger's New York Times dispatches on the fighting are emotion-dripping dramatizations of this line. In subsequent articles I will show that: 1) Hezbollah is not just "an Islamic militant group ["which is supported by both Syria and Iran"- AP] that operates in southern Lebanon." Yes, Hezbollah does receive large-scale financial and military aid from Iran, and this would be difficult without Syria, but Hezbollah is a dangerous force on its own. Combining Islamic fanaticism with a modern antisemitic ideology derived from the Catholic Church and Nazism, having a mass base in Lebanon, with a violently antisemitic media that reaches worldwide, it stands for the destruction of world Jewry and the creation of a world Islamic state, modeled on Iran. 2) Perhaps most important, the Lebanese government is not an innocent bystander. Facilitated by the US, the European Union and the United Nations, Lebanon has developed close ties with Iran and incorporated Hezbollah into the basic fabric of state domestic and international relations, enshrining Hezbollah as the Resistance, giving free reign to Hezbollah's Nazi-like army, which certainly makes democracy impossible, permitting Hezbollah's media to broadcast the most violent antisemitism worldwide, and giving Hezbollah direct control of important government affairs. I will present hard evidence for this, including my charge of US complicity. - continued - Jared
Israel ======================================= [1] Based on press reports, if an armed
multinational force is installed in southern Lebanon, it will be comprised
mainly of troops under European and Arab command, that is, under the command of
states that portray Israel's conflict with Palestinian Arabs as the cause of the
Arab-Israeli conflict (rather than the other way around) and that do not
consider Hezbollah a jihadist army with the most extreme antisemitic ideas
and goals. Such a multinational force would have much in common with William
Walker's Kosovo Verification Mission. It too had the stated purpose of
separating belligerents, and it was hostile to Yugoslavia.
According to Kosovo historian
Cedomir Prlincevic, that multinational force was used as a cover for upgrading
and training the Kosovo Liberation Army (for which substitute Hezbollah)
terrorists. See the interview, "How NATO used the Kosovo Verification Mission to
Liaison with the KLA and Stage Albanian Flight." Once a powerful multinational force was ensconced in
southern Lebanon, it would be in position to intervene directly in Israel and
the disputed territories.
[2] "President Bush Meets with British Prime Minister Blair," Press
briefing, July 16, 2006. Cottage Nine; Konstantinovsky Palace Complex;
Strelna, Russia; G-8 Summit 2006 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060716.html
[4]
"Rice outlines strategy for
Israel-Hezbollah peace; Bush and Rice to meet with Saudi officials," The
Associated Press, July 21, 2006 Friday, 6:36 PM GMT, Washington Dateline,
805 Words, By Anne Gearan, AP Diplomatic Writer, Washington For a list of Emperor's
Clothes articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict, the problem of antisemitism, and
related issues, go to ***
Please forward this text or send the link to a friend. ~~~ From Yugoslav
Reports... The Great 'Unilateral
Disengagement' Swindle and What it Tells about US-Israeli Relations - Part
1 (1) Evidence of high-level government complicity
(2) Interviews related to 9-11 &
Afghanistan (3) Osama Bin Laden’s involvement in Western attacks on
Afghanistan and the Balkans. Evidence he kept his ties with the
CIA. (4) US/West European links to Islamic
Fundamentalism (5) Evidence that “Strategic Racism”is the method of the
US/Euro Empire. (6) What is the US/Euro Strategy in Central Asia? We argue
that it’s not about
oil...
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
__,_._,___ |
