2.The Taliban didn’t originally have an anti-US agenda, and very close to 9/11 there was talk of opening a Taliban embassy in Washington DC. But any cozying up with the Taliban may allienate Iran, if Iran gets in the US ship and “civilises” the nuclar conundrum, changes course on Israel (there was an Israeli Embassy in Teheran until 1979, in a building in Niavaran, now occupied by the PA and Hamas) and “modernises” under Khatami or others (for example, from the technocratic Ravand Instiute).
3. In the larger chess board, the real revolution would be peace between a peaceful, developped Iran and a democratic and non-bellicose Israel. The two countries don’t have an history of animosity prior to the Islamic Revolution, nor territorial, demographic or economic/natural resources claims.
4. This could anger Saudi Arabia, but that is another story.
5. The NIE estimate on Iran revealed two things (not only one): that Iran had a nuclear weapons program, and that it stopped (although there is no much detail on its status – cancellation, suspension or postponement).
6. Although Ross may sound like many people from other sides of the spectrum, as far as i know he never preached a military attack against Tehran, but increased international pressure and sanctions. The same for the Holbrooke-Woolsey lobby.

Nuno Rogeiro
Lisbon
Portugal

By soft zionism I mean hidden zionism. When it comes to Israel, Chomsky assiduously covers his affiliation with his jewish tribe. He has even negated the jewish lobby and its influence on the US foreign policy. On the zionist genociding of Palestinians from the air with F16s he would tell us, it is a matter of israeli pilots flying US made jet fighters or helicopters. He often cites the American crimes in Vietnam as a missing evidence for the jewish lobby. But he should know very well, that the American imperialsim ist not restricted to the war crimes in Vietnam. Henry Kissinger, a war criminal and architect of the US foreign policy at that time may had not been representing zionist interests in Vietnam. What about the Middle East?

He is for a two state solution, because he is concerned about the jewish entity. A one state would endanger the jews in their heritage and self-concept.

Thank you

but i don’t expect pals to accept dozens of mostly untouching neighborhoods for a ’state’ under constant threat.
i still hold hope that fatah has not changed its basics. fatah may see the obvious: nothing can be achieved by military means. however, i do not condemn hamas and other resistance groups.
with just US so viciously antipal’n, pals are not going anywhere.
so, choose lesser evil: oppression, barricades, walls, child hunts, torture, kidnapping, etc.

i’ve already stated that chomsky, et al, is a mini zionist. US may be medi or maxi zionistic. and chomsky is worried about that; he just approbates the initial theft of land and the expulsion of pals.
but then 99.99% of all ‘jews’ do likewise. thnx

Chomsky, a linguist, uses semantics to cover his soft zionism. Yes, the USA Empire has many agents in a well designed chain of dependencies. Zionism is not the only, but a major variable in imperialism.

Thank you

I rarely use his name except in an occasional response to others. He does not “own” the idea of American Empire nor the fact that it is run by corporate plutocrats.

However, I do agree with you on one key point divesture is very important and Chomsky is clearly on the wrong side of that.

I also think, and here there is more controversy, that there should be a one state solution, right of return for Palestinians being absolutely central. Again, Chomsky is on the other side.

But again, I won’t through the “baby out with the water” just because I disagree with Chomsky on key (and I think important) issues. If he has blind followers (like the ones who follow Obama like lost sheep) well what good are they to this cause that demands much more….

Zionism rears its ugly head as it converges with the corporate plutocracy, but it is but a segment of the total USA Empire landscape.

Max

It is very important we keep these facts in mind. Narrowly thinking this is simply a Zionist plot, misses the vital distinctions. The enemy is the corporate plutocracy which has its tentacles around the US government and it’s foreign policies.

I generally agree with Max’s cautionary remarks is so far as activist should look at all of the interlocking aspects of oppression. That corporate plutocracy is AMONG the enemies. We should not lose sight that racism operates alongside the corporate plutocracy as well. There is also a caution that needs to be observed from the focus solely on the “corporate plutocracy”.

The Left over the past GENERATION has used all of its cache and influence to OBSCURE Zionism as a problem. The focus on Zionism is only a RECENT occurrence. It has been the obfuscation of Zionism especially by the Left that has allowed this rancid ideology to flourish.

Confronting Zionism in fact will help activist to fight ALL forms of oppression — corporate plutocracy as well as racism because it will help EDUCATE people about being vigilant against all forms of oppression. Remember that MLK didn’t tie militarism, materialism, and racism together until 1967. To remain relevant he too had to EXPAND his focus.

And this is why someone like Noam Chomsky is IRRELEVANT despite all of the energy he has used to keep activist focused SOLELY on the “corporate plutocracy”. To be relevant and to be effective activist must confront the plutocracy AND RACISM. The two go hand in hand.

I share Max’s caution but as history has shown fighting racism will eventually lead to fighting the plutocracy. Therefore for now I welcome the growing awareness of the need to confront Zionism among activists.

The Dems and Republicans have carved out a vocabulary difference. During his tenure, George W. Bush said almost exactly the same thing as our new President recites. The tenure and stress is ever so slightly different. Bush agrees we need to close Gitmo, and Obama says, yes, in a year (or so). Bush says the US does not “torture” and Obama says the same. And those are the “big” differences so far (i.e., no difference at all).

The “war on terror” is the language of both Obama and Bush. The occupation in Iraq continues with no end in sight (given Obama’s statements) and the Afghanistan “war on terror” is going to be ramped up with no end in sight.

But we must step back from the moment, so close as to be blinding. We must see how the US has managed the Middle East (in much the same fashion as the rest of its empire). It owns the leaders and supports their control over the population.

We know through polls that Arabs and Persians/Iranians (and so far Syria) are on the same page concerning support for the Palestinians over the Western/Israel murderers and occupiers. But this is not true of the rulers of the other Arab nations. The latter are firmly in the pocket of the US. A little nod now and then to the Palestinian plight, but no real intervention when Israel murders Palestinian children. Abbas has become another lackey for US imperialism. Bought and delivered.

But for the Arab people, on the street the story is entirely different.

It is very important we keep these facts in mind. Narrowly thinking this is simply a Zionist plot, misses the vital distinctions. The enemy is the corporate plutocracy which has its tentacles around the US government and it’s foreign policies.

This plutocracy is a convergence of mutual interests which are played out in the political arena where the congress and the executive branch are patsies. This is not new. When FDR had the chance he never killed the evil plutocrats, but saved their asses, and let them go on until they’ve grown into the monster that holds total control over this so-called republic aka USA Imperial Empire. Empire was made possible through the use of corporate charters. The link is inseparable.

Never Surrender Your Freedom!

but from just talking to working class canadians or even middle class, one realizes to what degree these people are misled. thnx

Obama is simply another shade of Bush. The MSM knows this to be the case which is why they (the pundits) state that the window dressing (closing Gitmo, “no” torture ala GWB’s exact words) in no way changes the foreign (and hence domestic) trajectory of the USA Empire.

It seems we lose sight of this even as the Zionists here and in Israel slaughter Palestinian children, civilian women and men.

We lose sight of the entire geopolitical game that has been going on for over a century as soon as the US took the imperial empire mantle from the Brit Empire. It is the US who keeps the oligarchies in power in the ME (that’s the Arab oligarchies). The idea is to keep Middle Eastern public oppressed. The US has agreements with these oligarchies (Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt…) no less binding than the one it has with Israel to ensure they stay in power and the oil continues to be in US control.

The enemy for these plutocracies is the people – the “street” must be kept at bay, but be at once divided and ruled.

If you think all of this is about Zionism your thinking is dangerously flawed.

You are right. Therefore I cited the story above. With Obamas’ cabinet including the shiny raaaaaaahm from Israel the future is indeed gloomy. Obama, who stood in Al Quds and spoke of an undivided Jerusalem, has clearly put obstacles in Palestinans ‘ way. Not even G. W. Bush has spit out such a declaration. Yes, under the current conditions the prognosis is miserable.

Thank you

The article is on point and is meant to secure the energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia for the Empire. That will not happen, not because of ‘opposition’ in the US, but because locals in these regions will oppose such designs.

America supports UMA. America wants endless war. America wants its armament factories working 24 hours a day. America wants to expand its imperial grasp on the world.

Peace? Forget it!

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

America supports UMA. America wants endless war. America wants its armament factories working 24 hours a day. America wants to expand its imperial grasp on the world.

Peace? Forget it!

I hope to be mistaken and able to say, Obama is a good guy.