The first shocking thing to emerge is eloquently narrated in this statement of a U.S. Supreme Court Judge:

– “Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” — Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951 AD

Namely, the moral relativism, which is seeded in the ‘ubermench’ morality of the supermen, as noted by Leo Strauss in the following words:

‘Political Zionism has repeatedly characterized itself as the will to normalize the existence of the Jewish people, to normalize the Jewish people. By this self-definition it has exposed itself to a grave misunderstanding, namely, the misunderstanding that the will to normality was the first word of political Zionism; the most effective criticism of political Zionism rests on this misunderstanding. In truth, the presupposition of the Zionist will to normalization, that is, of the Zionist negation of galut [exile], is the conviction that “the power of religion has been broken”. Because the break with religion has been resolutely effected by many individual Jews, and only because of this reason, it is possible for these individuals to raise the question on behalf of their people, how the people is to live from now on. Not that they prostrate themselves before the idol of normality; on the contrary: they no longer see any reason for the lack of normality. And this is decisive: in the age of atheism, the Jewish people can no longer base its existence on God but only on itself alone, on its labor, on its land, and on its state. …’ — Leo Strauss, The Early Writings 1921-1932, page 202

The second thing which shockingly emerges when one imbibes from the vista afforded by the forest, is rooted in the realism expressed on Project Humanbeingsfirst’s About: http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/#About

‘In the simplest terms: “Might defines right” leads to “Hegemony is as old as mankind”, which in turn leads to “If we don’t have real enemies then we have to create or imagine some and yell ‘we are being attacked’” in order to a) justify one’s hegemonic barbarianism upon others; and b) motivate an unwilling plebeian peoples into sacrificing for the conquests of the ruling elite. Euphemistically: “imperial mobilization”. Grotesquely: “quest for Lebensraum”. That’s all there is to it. This “quest for Lebensraum” just happens to be the age-old quest for world-government, to be achieved piece-meal, one fait accompli at a time, one fabricated crisis at a time. The solution presented for each manufactured crisis is the next baby-step towards centralized control of all humanity in a global empire of the oligarchs.’

When applied to Israel-Palestine, all complex matters become immensely simple and straightforward to understand, as was noted in this letter to De Paul University’s President in 2007 when Prof. Norm Finkelstein was about to be fired:

http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/04/deconstructing-hullabaloo-finkelstein.html

Here is the key explanation:

Begin Excerpt:

Dear DePaul U. President and Provost,

I hope you won’t mind if I summarize what this issue is really all about rather straightforwardly. After this summary, I include below the open letter that I had emailed you on April 10, 2007, as well as a letter to the editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education that I had emailed them on April 13, 2007. I was notified by the Chronicle this past Friday, when the letters on this topic were finally published in the Friday April 27, 2007 issue, that my letter was not among the two that they printed. Hence you can read this letter here.

What this issue is not about is Norm Finkelstein. And all this talk of suitability of scholarly credentials, etc., is entirely a clever red herring. So for instance, had NF only written about, say, the native American Indians’ theft of their ancestral home lands of thousands of years of continuous inhabitation at the hands of the foreign settlers to the New World, or the military acquisition of California from Mexico – since these momentous events are now irreversible faits accomplis that we all recognize today as history long past, and which only serve the interest of torturing high school students in getting them to nod their heads in profound wisdom of how cruel some constructions of nations can be – this would not be an issue.

What this issue is in fact about is to continue permitting the full faits accomplis of a new settlement of another peoples’ brutally usurped land that is now very much in progress, even as I write this in April 2007, in the supposed ‘enlightened’ modernity of the 21st century.

As evidence of the unimpeachable veracity of this statement, may I humbly point to the vehement attacks on the distinguished former American President Jimmy Carter by this same antagonist from Harvard Law School and his equally distinguished coterie of fellow intellectuals, 14 of whom presumably resigned in protest from the Carter Center, when the former American President dared to even speak out, as anemically as he did, against this new settlement in progress. A monumental crime against humanity that the world not only spectates silently at the expense of a suffering peoples, but the American public directly aids and abets in its commission by virtue of permitting their super power nation – a “populist democracy” – to financially, politically militarily, and culturally support it by being deliberately kept uninformed about it by their institutional ruling elite.

So if this wasn’t Norm Finkelstein, but say Zahir Ebrahim, the plebeian ordinary me, and my heritage had as much distinctive weight to give my voice of conscience against this monumental crime any credibility before the American public, I would have experienced the same fate. As did Jimmy Carter. And so does Norman Finkelstein. Nothing either of them has written is so intellectually profound that one can not know simply by examining the thousands of books and documents that exist in the Israeli Government’s own archives, in the victims’ own archives, and by simply visiting the Holy Land of oppression – not the Tel Aviv side, but the West Bank side. Or simply by reading a narrative in a Palestinian victim’s own voice who is born on that soil, whose father, grandparents, and great… were all born on that soil, such as the notable and heart wrenching “Refugees in our Own Land” by Muna Hamzeh, that one can purchase in any American book store. The best $25 you can spend in easily acquiring first hand knowledge of the incredible veracity and brutal honesty of the scholarship of Norm Finkelstein – his main and courageous virtue – of exposing simple moral truths in a mainstream of deception.

So what is Finkelstein’s crime? It has to be examined in the light of his very first crime – a challenge to Joan Peters who had reproduced the Zionist narrative of “A land without a people for a people without a land” in pseudo scholarship and largely for consumption in this nation for the benefit of its gullible and uninformed peoples. For elsewhere, the people of the world are indeed allowed to hear the passionate narratives of the indigenous natives of the ‘land without a people’ themselves. But in America, such narratives are not permitted to be heard in the voices of the victims themselves – the unfortunate and forgotten children of a ‘lesser god’, the P-A-L-E-S-T-I-N-I-A-N-S – within the mainstream discourse!

So it falls to the lot of men and women of uncommon conscience, and uncommon moral courage, like Norm Finkelstein, to provide them a voice before the peoples of his own nation.

But that voice is very inconvenient while the fait accompli is still incrementally in progress, and the support of American peoples – who know the history of how their own land was settled by the slaughter of 10 million indigenous natives very well – is crucial in achieving that fait accompli. As one of the main thinkers and former National Security Advisor of this august nation had candidly noted in his book: “Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization”.

Thus that’s what this hullabaloo is all about.

End Excerpt.

And this is still what this hullabaloo is all about. Self serving beating oneself silly is the signature of the Zionists, as noted by Golda Meir: “We can forgive them for killing our kids, but we cannot forgive them for making us kill theirs’. All they want, through all their tactics, red herrings, is incremental fait accompli that is subsequently not reversible.

Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

The arrival is being broadcast live now by Press TV.
http://www.presstv.ir/watch_live.aspx

No mention of this at all on the BBC apart from a few lines when the convoy left on February 14th. They wrote many lines then about the wrongful arrest of six men from the North West of England who were arrested on the motorway by the Lancashire police on some trumped up charges. They were all later released and rejoined the convoy in France.

Trading ambassadors is a bit much. Israel still occupies the rest of Palestine – and establishing diplomatic relations is tantamount to legitimizing the Israeli land grab. So not likely any time soon.

Israel has been promised full relations – politically and economically – via the Arab League offer (all 22 states). But Israel and the Israelis have to decide if they want peace more than land. So far Israel has chosen to go for the land but that’s because they have paid little for this choice. It’s time the Arab world upped the ante on Israel and the US.

And you are right about the Arab world not having been a hindrance to US policy. Of course, there has been a major oversight in US official and popular thinking. 9/11 should have been the elephant in the room regards US foreign policy. Instead, Bush took it as permission to effect regime change – in lieu of changing US policy positively. So while al-Qaeda may (or may not) be in disarray, the conditions that result in angry young men looking for such outlets still exists. In the Arab world, as in the wider Muslim world, each new year turns out many millions of boys entering adulthood. Even the college-educated, even those with engineering degrees have little or no prospect of a steady job – never mind a career – never mind providing sufficiently for a family. Complicating the dismal economic prospects is the fact that their governments cannot be petitioned except thru carefully circumscribed means. Essentially, these governments are not answerable to the people – except when the cover is about to blow off the pot. So there are tens of millions of young males (and females) ranging from disgruntled to seething. It only takes a tiny percentage of them to join the battle against Western hegemony to put the world right back on edge again.

The answers lie in these countries developing industries for their own markets and pushing for a global economic system that gives them a fair price for their products. Politically, instead of the West – led by the US – rewarding leaders for suppression of dissent, these countries need to be rewarded for relaxing repression and encouraging the formation of democratic civil institutions.

I think time is of the essence as world energy equations begin to change, economies slip deeper into recession/depression (always worse for the lesser developed world), and as environmental regimes start to play out with major temperature/precipitation/sea level changes.

Thank you so much for the detailed analysis. The U.S. might not be able to continue Israel’s welfare handout in the usual style. As to alienating the Arab world, I do not see any serious threat to the U.S. position, since the Arab allies (Agents) in Egypt, Gordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Emirates seem to be stable. We do not know how long. So far the alienation of the Arab world had hardly been a hindrance to the U.S. domination and humiliation in the Middle East.

In case the U.S. financial support weakens, I assume Israel has the capability of increasing its weapons exports getting a pretty good ioncome.

Thank you again, Barry !

We are also entering a period where the economic crisis, the energy crisis and the environmental crisis (the 3 Big E-crises) are going to put the region (and a good deal of the world) in positions where dramatic economic or political actions start seeming inevitable. It just might be that the US cannot continue Israel’s welfare handout in the style to which it is accustomed. Or it even might be that the US finally takes a stand in the UN when the US figures out it cannot continue alienating the Arab world. It might be that regional drought puts Israel in a big bind for water. Contrary to Israeli boasts, Israeli is a major waster of water. Water desalination is still really expensive – so Israel will be depending more and more on water imports from Turkey. What if Israel does not work hard enough on good relations with Turkey? Or if the Turks use the water issue as leverage? Of course, northern Iraq is well-watered. As important as oil is to Israel, they are also thinking of piping in water from a potentially independent Kurdistan. But that means piping water thru less than enthusiastic Arab states – so the pressure on Israel on this matter could be substantial.

Of course, Israel can continue on its present course of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Maybe that will work! The Palestinians would not be the first people disappeared from history (or should I say, relegated to history). But Palestinian resistance to being moved en masse is pretty fierce. And I think that even Israelis understand now that they cannot have it all. Still, their government and the popular media work night and day keeping Israelis in a state of continuous disinformation and ignorance. So Israelis one time after another vote their fears. I don’t know what will break this logjam. Israelis identify with the State more than perhaps any other people. I don’t know how to get them to relate to a larger context – it may require events that present a new reality.

All in all, I’m getting the feeling that many more people in Europe and America (and certainly elsewhere) are beginning to see Israel as an obstacle. Whether that translates into a movement like that against Apartheid South Africa remains to be seen. But Israeli honchos don’t go to Europe anymore for fear of arrest for war crimes. I think the ‘water behind the dam’ is near capacity. A lot of things may come together to present a new reality in the coming years – a substantial shift in regional relations. I say this now, not having believed things would substantially change even a few years ago.

As these things are essentially what Palestinians (WB&G) want accepting and acting on the offer in good faith would essentially bring peace to the region. There is one caveat. No one truly s speaks for the refugees. Just as Israeli leadership should not assume it speaks for Jews elsewhere, we cannot assume that Fatah, Hamas, or the Arab League speaks for the refugees. The refugee situation is the soft underbelly in all negotiations – and their desires must be given full consideration. Still, it is the unknown.

That would be a good first step to contribute to the Peace process.

It also can speed things up.
Palestinian “leadership” will not need to do a “road show” every time they need to make a decision.

“all 22 Arab states have put that offer on the table. The clock is ticking.”

In response to my comments on “Arab heroism” and Palestinian suffering elsewhere on DV you have already stressed that the clock is ticking. What do you think would happen, if the Israelis definitely reject the offer of the Arab League, UN resolution 242, returning to pre June 1967 borders > accepting Israel as a state?

Thank you

Gideon fears my Socratic Method, because he cannot rebuke reason. He prefers numbers, which he can fake and misinterpret. Zionism is sentenced to fear of reason.

barry,if that’s the case i would have thought that the answer to the conflict is for the palestinians to be re-settled amongst their arab brethern in jordan,the gulf states and any other arab country prepared to help their moslem brothers.
no arabs in israel would mean an end to the “apartheid” in israel,an end to the violence in the area and all nations,moslem and jewish can get along with each other,trading,helping use israeli technology to improve the backward arab existence etc.

You prefer long mails, lengthy lists of names and numbers where you run and fetch fraudulent statistical statements as a rebuke fitting into your Zionism. My Socratic Method (reasoning, asking, suggesting) seems to frighten you and make you helpless.

Persian is a culture like Arabic if one speaks Persian as a first language. To the extent that Iranians speak Kurdish, etc. is the extent they likely see themselves as another ethnicity. That of course does not mean they want to separate from Iran.

I agree 100% that the Israeli state goal is an Israel in all of Palestine. The Israeli effort at ‘deterrence’ is really an effort to kill as many Palestinians as necessary so that the rest flee to Jordan, or for that matter, anywhere. This means making life for Palestinians almost impossible to negotiate, from constant minor bureaucratic harassment to land confiscation to full-scale mass murder – whatever it takes to get them to leave.

I really don’t think that Israel is interested in world domination. Israel was founded only because it had a major power gentile sponsor, the UK. It is able to function as a rogue state today because it still has a major largely gentile sponsor, the US. Israel cannot achieve any real degree of domination without a major gentile sponsor. What Israel risks when it attempts to go well beyond its place is another Holocaust. The Nazi Holocaust had its origins in German Jews being perceived as too powerful and non-assimilationist. Israel runs the risk of similar circumstances if it proceeds in a similar manner. As far as borders go, Israel would like full control over the Gulf of Aqaba, they would like to own both sides of the Jordan River (though likely not much more into Jordan), they would like to own Lebanon up to the Litani and the Syrian Golan because it enables Israel to overlook Syria and the upper waterways of the Jordan River. They’ve already been removed from much of this and even the Israeli citizens’ appetite for conquering new land has waned. Most Israelis want out of even the West Bank.
Israel’s competition with Iran is indeed over regional hegemony. Israel would surely like to remain the only nuclear power in the area. But the nuclear confrontation I believe is a proxy for the fact that Iran’s support for Hezballa enables the latter to retain Lebanese sovereignty over land that Israel wants. The US concern over Iran’s program is, of course, because that’s what Israel wants.
Ultimately, Israel takes its allies where it can get them, and works hard at maintaining the US as its big power sponsor. But while Israel has few allies, Israel itself is the ally of no one – it operates on two tracks or multiple tracks at the same time. While it nurtures US guarantees regarding protection and energy security, it also works on its relations with surrounding non-Arab (and even Arab!) states and with resource rich nations in Africa and Latin America. This is why Israel can both reject and accept US umbrella at the same time. And for that matter, my understanding is that Israel in the last year or two told Bush regime that if the US did not bomb Iran with conventional weapons, Israel would do so with nuclear devices. Bush Administration said no, and no. And so Iran was spared – for now. And you are of course correct in saying that Iran has not attacked anyone in hundreds of years – and is not about to do so now. The threat is all Israeli propaganda.

The desire for an independent Kurdistan goes back many decades and precedes Israeli interest. An independent Kurdistan should not be held hostage to anti-Israeli sentiments. Self-determination for all peoples is a principle that applies to Kurds as well as Palestinians. If it does not apply to both peoples – then what is the point of advocating for any people?
Kurdistan has foolishly cast its lot in with the US too many times so far. If they can finally turn the tables and actually achieve independence then so be it. The Kurds will have to deal with the Israelis as everyone else must.
And of course, we should understand that Iraq’s borders are as arbitrary as any in the world – including Sudan. Just as there is no good reason that Kuwait should not have been included in Iraq, there is no good reason that Kurdistan should have been included. In fact, as per the Hussein-McMahon correspondence, Southwest Asia should have freely determined its own borders.
With regard to rejecting undue Israeli influence in foreign affairs as we would undue American influence – I reject both. Neither are desirable.

My reason for advocating a two-state solution is, one – that is what polls show that Palestinians want. Now why would Palestinians want that? Because Palestinians now understand Israel to be an unmovable object. It has now been around longer than most of their lifetimes and is not going anywhere.
Two – Jews have now been born in that country for all of its 62 years (and some in the pre-state years). They have only that country, they can no longer be forced to move to the US or Germany any more than one can ask Protestant Northern Irish to move to Scotland or England – the homes of their ancestors.
Three – I believe the General Assembly votes every March on the 2 state solution. The vote usually goes something like 164 to 7. The seven being Israel, US, Australia (when it has conservative gov’t), and also the Pacific Ocean powerhouses of Palau, Nauru, the Marshall Islands, and Marquesas, which total population of these states almost equals that of literary contributors to this website. The rest of the world favors two-state. So do the 22 Arab League states – and 36 or so Muslim states. So too does Fatah – and lastly so too does Hamas. This last is the ultimate threat to Israel – the threat of moderation. The last thing Israeli leaders want to hear is a Hamas that accepts Israel within pre-67 borders. That is why Palestine must be subject to periodic bouts of deterrence. Israel cannot get the rest of Palestine without the ‘fear factor.’ So Israelis are raised to inflict punishment on their neighbors.

Besides, I wouldn’t wish living with Israelis on anyone, Really, no one likes Israeli culture – not even American Jews.

If you should be visiting the UK you could go to the British Museum where there is a wonderful new exhibition showing the period of Shah Abbas’s reign at the turn of the 17th century – ‘The Remaking of Iran’. Calligraphy, books and their bindings, poetry,writings, beautiful carpets and silk weavings, bronze and jade objects, ceramics, simulations of the architecture and interiors of the amazing buildings he created in Isfahan are all there to see and wonder at. The history of the region is also explained clearly and there are even Christian artefacts from the period on display as other religions lived in harmony in Iran.

It was pleasing to leave the exhibition with the feeling that unusually Iran was not being demonized and that their culture should be admired and not denigrated.

With that in mind you might be interested to read about the modern day Jewish community who are perfectly happy living in Iran. Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb elucidates.

http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2009/02/a-rabbis-reflection-on-iran.html

I do not feel entitled to function as a commissar. In the English language the verb “should” implies a suggestion. You should try to change your attitude means, I suggest you change your attitude.

Asking whether I have any opinion on the subject, reflects your determination to evade the topic.