Normally I enjoy reading James Petras but on topics he is well versed in which are primarily related to South America. However, to attack Noam Chomsky and others as he has done in this piece goes quite a bit over the top.

Though I am a fan of Professor Chomsky I don’t agree with everything he says. His stand on Pol Pot was quite inexcusable (though I do not have any knowledge for such reasoning) and his relapses into obfuscation when being questioned about 9-11 are quite surprising.

Nonetheless, Professor Chomsky has been a stalwart defender of the rights of Palestinians (and Americans) and has written definitive studies on the topic such as “Fateful Triangle” which places successive Israeli governments along with US encouragement and support square in the bulls-eye for war-crimes.

Professor Chomsky has long stood for a complete restructuring of American foreign policy and has rarely pulled his punches when placing the blame where it so deservedly belongs. I doubt few can offer the same strength of character in this venue.

Though I don’t completely agree with his view on AIPAC and other such pro-Israeli groups, Professor Chomsky has correctly placed t he emphasis of this problem on the shoulders of the American Jewish community along with those they support in government as well as those who are rabid devotees to Israeli interests.

Singling out AIPAC as a political crime-family in this instance is simply taking a faulty direct approach. It is those people and organizations that allow such organizations to exist while at the same time pandering to their every whim who are to blame. And these entities are purely “All American”…

If you’re too thick to understand it, I actually already stated the evidence, which includes using Israel as a rather obvious threat and cultural distraction. Here’s the overarching reality stated as well as possible: “a policy of keeping a region divided and embittered, and therefore accessible to the franchisers of weaponry and the owners of black gold.”

And, by the way, mouthing off is also describing oneself as “an adviser to” [the entirety of?] “the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina.” Megalomania much?

Zionism is part of the evil, for sure, at least as it has configured itself. It is no more evil than the corporatism and predatory capitalism and American Exceptionalism, or neolib/con-isms. They all feed off domination.

Our very survival requires that we not only reject but find means of transforming this state. Beating our collective heads against the “anti-war movement” that was “gummed up” by the “left” who love “zionism” is a deadender issue.

You can either kick the hell out of that worthless can or begin to do something constructive. There are millions who are.

I completely understand that a Palestinian would see the primary evil as Zionism and the Lukud Party and the US policies. I not only understand but completely but agree that that the evil (Zionism) is manifested for them on a daily basis.

But Americans live in the belly of the beast and it is multi-headed and unidirectionally preditory. It doesn’t just eat up external continents, but turns its cities into wasteland colonies. We have a blend of all evils – apartheid, land barrons, preditory financiers, disembowlers of neighborhoods, destroyers of human life, emptying homes of millions and throwing them into conditions of homelessness.

WE ARE THE METEPHOR known as Iraq and Afghanistan and Darfur and Sudan.

The CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST! We can no longer hide from this imperialism it is knocking at our doors with a vengence.

That’s the evil Americans are facing on a daily basis.

Tell me though, how did Zionists in September 2001 convince “leftists” like Kucinich and McKinney to vote YES on the AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force) – which gave Bush open-ended war powers which he promptly used to invade Afghanistan.

Or is this where we insert the excuse “they were tricked” or “they was still in shock from 9/11″?

hp – Michael Scheuer. The CIA head analyst for the unit on Osama bin Laden. Scheuer wrote “Through Our Enemies Eyes” under the name “Anonymous” but outed himself before the ink was dry on the book. All of course after his federal government benefits/retirement funds were secure.

Know this though – CIA analysts are desk jockeys, reading reports from various sources, to “analyze” and write another report which goes to a bigger boss who may or may sign off on it and send it to someone who may or may not send it to the President. And such reports may be blue penciled and returned so the analyst can make “changes” b/c ideology is involved all the way up and down the chain. And if by chance an analyst is asked to re-do a report that has been changed to something he/she disagrees with, well there’s always that career to consider … the “insiders” who should talk, never talk. The “head” of a CIA desk still has many folks over him or her they have to please, who in turn have to please those over them, and on and on. Think of the Peter Principle.

Deadbeat: you’re better off teaching our friend evie from the Flat Earth Society the alphabet first. Frankly, its not worth the time.

Ekosmo writes:

The Fanon enters…

meantime, I can also do ‘Yawns’
but you’re interesting, so I wont…

I respond: Yawn!

Deadbeat
How does AIPAC/Zionism hold such tremendous power over US government policy?

I don’t see why I have to do YOUR research. However since unlike you I don’t engage in conjecture, misinformation, or ridicule to make an argument or rebuttal. However here are a few links for you.

Project For New American Century

Mearsheimer and Walt

Are They Really Oil Wars?

The Power of the Israel Lobby

I’ll reiterate my point …
“What I saw coming from the Left was the constant “War for Oil” refrain without any regard for the possibility of Zionism’s influence but most importantly deliberately ignoring intellectual and former CIA insiders and elites having no connection ideologically who were not only raising doubts about the War on Iraq but also highlighting the influence of Zionism on U.S. policy.”

And your response is …
Your attention is being directed to look in a particular direction by all these so-called insiders and elites who somehow managed to live without developing any ideological motives or connections; who are just giving you the “truth” outta the goodness of their patriotic hearts. Too funny.

And you choose not to look at any evidence or analysis and would rather engage in mindless condescension and ridicule to make a rebuttal. In a previous response to you I displayed enough respect to offer you a cogent response. However what I have notice is that those who want to refute, obscure and camouflage the influence and power of Zionism upon the U.S Middle East policies offer up nothing but conjecture, condescension and ridicule as rebuttal. They, like evie, Max and bozidar never supply or offer facts or evidence to support their arguments.

What makes it even more egregious for the so-called “Left” goes to great length not only to downplay Zionism is that you’ll be ridiculed by them even if you SUGGEST that Zionism played an iota of a role. In other words if you suggest that the War on Iraq was for something other than “oil” or “imperialism” or “disaster capitalism” or “shock doctrine” then their response to any such consideration is ridicule.

What makes this stand out even more is that the Left profess to uphold certain principles of truth and justice, equality and fairness, yet they cannot even vet their positions. If they were being truthful they wouldn’t have to engage is dismissive ridicule. Ergo the Left’s dishonesty is beginning to become more and even more difficult to conceal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tv82Gwo7i0#

maherhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tv82Gwo7i0

http://www.antiwar.com/scheuer/?articleid=13139

I agree they have influence – but so do hundreds of other lobbyists/PACs, foundations and organizations, that have nothing to do with Jews or Zionism. Ban them all.

Also, you say “… intellectual and former CIA insiders and elites having no connection ideologically…”

I have to say that is quite laughable. There is not now nor ever will be a “former CIA insider” who can trusted. There are a lot of low level CIA retired desk jockeys and knothead experts who are blowing smoke up butts, writing books, giving interviews. And, everyone, intellectual or not, has ideology.

Your attention is being directed to look in a particular direction by all these so-called insiders and elites who somehow managed to live without developing any ideological motives or connections; who are just giving you the “truth” outta the goodness of their patriotic hearts. Too funny.

great — somebody withan explosive new take — always welcome “round here” — and fiery, feisty ‘n hostile straight from the word ‘Go’ without even a Salaam Alekum or a by your leave …
I could like that but the “load of crap”, the “arse/posterior”, the “[I] say [I’m] a big boy” bit [...do I…?] make me pause ‘n ponder…

I “appear obsessed with personalities”… Oh really…?
I’m perhaps “obsessed” more with the core of what I stated: viz

that the Nth Ay-murkan “progressive movement’s” internecine warfare and divisive fratricide continues unabated

or the end-piece you skipped in the cut ‘n paste above:
re. …Zionist support-systems reading the above “debate” and chuckling into their chutzpah with an unmitigated glee…”

enlargement of the rest of the post — out from Grand Inquisitor Fanon’s “I only do facts” routine into plain, meaningful, common or garden English — might be appreciated…

meantime, I can also do ‘Yawns’
but you’re interesting, so I wont…

I’m not saying for one minute the criminal state of Israel should get off the hook for the genocide and barbarism they’ve created in the region. That said, we run the risk of overstating Israel and AIPAC/Zionism’s role in US foreign policy.

The problem is that the Left especially has gone to great length to obscure and camouflage AIPAC/Zionism’s role in the influence of U.S. Foreign Policy. The people who have spoken out ironically are former CIA agents like Bill and Cathy Christenson who have written many articles published by CounterPunch.

However Max your main argument is what is known as the “slippery slope” fallacy. What you want listeners to believe is that Zionism cannot possibly be an aspect or better yet cannot be the major impetus of U.S. Foreign Policy because it does not follow the within the confines of your premise. And that premise is U.S. “Imperialism” or “Capitalism”.
What allows you to continue in this vein is that the Left has confined all explanations of injustices emanating from the U.S. to these terms. Because these premises have been repeated over and over and because at times these premises are aligned with the historical record of the United States you are allowed to argue from CONJECTURE rather than from logical evidence.

Your desire to obscure the truth Max rather than CONFRONT the truth is the best illustration in this thread of why the Left is extremely weak and fractured in the United States. And most importantly why there is very little trust and virtually NO solidarity. Without trust there can never be solidarity and there can never be any possibility for fundamental change.

This became extremely evident during the anti-war movement of 2003 when there was a strain in the anti-war movement speaking out not only about the injustices towards the Palestinians and not just about Israeli Zionism but also about Zionism within the U.S. pushing for the war.

Personally I too got involved in the anti-war movement listening to my leftist colleagues who were pushing the line “No War for Oil”. I too came to accept the “Imperialism” canard as well. However there was one problem with all of this — access to new information, evidence, and analysis.

What I saw coming from the Left was the constant “War for Oil” refrain without any regard for the possibility of Zionism’s influence but most importantly deliberately ignoring intellectual and former CIA insiders and elites having no connection ideologically who were not only raising doubts about the War on Iraq but also highlighting the influence of Zionism on U.S. policy.

Yet we saw recently an article from the ISO citing Alan Greenspan as expert on the motive for the War on Iraq. In addition to their constant War for Oil refrain. What I found dubious and dishonest was that Zionism was NEVER considered to be a factor in the run up to the War and the left was making every effort to conceal, downplay, and outright ignore this very aspect even though the main authors of Project of a Century (PNAC) were rampant throughout the Bush Administration. In fact the ISO never mention PNAC while citing Greenspan. This is not just bad journalism this is intellectual treason.

The clear point is that the Left, and the ISO in particular, was behaving just like the Democrats: obfuscating, obscuring, camouflaging, misinforming. In other words the Left became the place where movements — in this case the anti-war movement — dies.

And then, still haven’t heard from Deadbeat, there is no real vision that you all are espousing. It’s all about pounding your fist and demanding that we all wake up and do SOMETHING?????

Max, clearly you haven’t read my recent comments to you. You claim that I have exposed no real vision. However I have in a response to evie in other thread.

The vision starts with defining the principles of the left. These are very simple and basic principles: truth, justice, fairness, equality and democracy. That should be the lens that all event should been seen through and analyzed through. In order to build a movement Max, truth is the most important principle. Without truth there can be no trust and without trust there can be no solidarity and without solidarity there can be no movement.

Trust Max is what you lack because you have chose not only to not face the truth but to expend an enormous amount of energy in order to obscure the truth. And as I said without there can be no trust and without trust there can be no solidarity and without solidarity there can be no movement.

As Petras concludes…

To continue to masquerade as ‘war critics’ while ignoring the central role of the Zionist Power Configuration makes pundits like Chomsky, Moyers and Powers and their acolytes irrelevant to the anti-war struggle. They are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Welcome, you are the third arse to arrive on this thread with his head carefully protected from the malign influence of facts up his posterior. The only people discussing personalities are those you say you agree with. I only do facts. Have you any to support your position, or challenge Petras’s? Come on, now. You say you are big boy who is impervious to ‘preconceived partisan notions’ (whatever those are supposed to be). Share some of that exalted wisdom.

If pressed outa my abject disinterest, I’d say I’m closer to Max S. than anyone else — so does that make me a “Zionist troll” or a “Left-Zionist sympathizer” or summin else altogether…?

Yawn!

You could have skipped the preamble then.

With more, much more important things tuh be gettin’ on with — other than this seemingly endless speculative and inconclusive hot air… hot air I might add that Petras articles increasingly seem to provoke — one thing’s for sure…

On the contrary, all the ‘hot air’ generated on this thread is yours and Max Shield’s only. The rest are here only to discuss issues. You appear obsessed with personalities.

And what were you doing to stop this war? I mean besides talking about some fictious left.

Its my opinion that much of the tired, moth-eaten, threadbare, time and energy-consuming analyzes above belong in the garbage bin, along with the still ubiquitous “who killed Kennedy”, or “was 9/11 an Inside Job” grand inquisitions…

Who really gives a hoot about what Chomsky, or Zunes, or Blankfort, or Meirs & Walt, or Sy Hersh, or Jimmy Carter, or similar “heretics” or “shining lights” — depending on your particular agenda or preconceived partisan notions — said on some or other occasion that categorically proves or disproves their loyalty or disloyalty — hidden or otherwise — to Israel and/or to the “Zionist Power Configuration”…?

If pressed outa my abject disinterest, I’d say I’m closer to Max S. than anyone else — so does that make me a “Zionist troll” or a “Left-Zionist sympathizer” or summin else altogether…?

With more, much more important things tuh be gettin’ on with — other than this seemingly endless speculative and inconclusive hot air… hot air I might add that Petras articles increasingly seem to provoke — one thing’s for sure…

Zionist support-systems reading the above “debate” must be chuckling into their chutzpah with an unmitigated glee… !!!

Dr. Petras’ perspectives are not those you will typically find in the mainstream. What makes the effort even more difficult is that the supposed “left” have been willing accomplices in the effort to obscure and camoflage Zionism powerful influence of the American political economy.

What is deplorable has been those voices on the “left” who even went as far as to demobilize the antiwar movement in order to prevent people from raising uncomfortable questions regarding Zionism’s influence.

The left is suppose to represent and uphold principles of trust, justice, equality, fairness and democracy but unfortunately many on the left are much more form than substance. It is the lack of substance and adherence to aforementioned principles that exposes them as frauds as well as retarded and setback solidarity overall.