The US War against Iraq

The Destruction of a Civilization

The US seven-year war and occupation of Iraq is driven by several major political forces and informed by a variety of imperial interests. However these interests do not in themselves explain the depth and scope of the sustained, massive and continuing destruction of an entire society and its reduction to a permanent state of war. The range of political forces contributing to the making of the war and the subsequent US occupation include the following (in order of importance).

The most important political force was also the least openly discussed. The Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC), which includes the prominent role of long-time, hard-line unconditional Jewish supporters of the State of Israel appointed to top positions in the Bush Pentagon (Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz ), key operative in the Office of the Vice President (Irving (Scooter) Libby), the Treasury Department (Stuart Levey), the National Security Council (Elliot Abrams) and a phalanx of consultants, Presidential speechwriters (David Frum), secondary officials and policy advisers to the State Department. These committed Zionists ‘insiders’ were buttressed by thousands of full-time Israel-First functionaries in the 51 major American Jewish organizations, which form the President of the Major American Jewish Organizations (PMAJO). They openly stated that their top priority was to advance Israel’s agenda, which, in this case, was a US war against Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein, occupy the country, physically divide Iraq, destroy its military and industrial capability and impose a pro-Israel/pro-US puppet regime. If Iraq were ethnically cleansed and divided, as advocated by the ultra-right, Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and the ‘Liberal’ President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and militarist-Zionist, Leslie Gelb, there would be more than several ‘client regimes’.

Top Zionist policymakers who promoted the war did not initially directly pursue the policy of systematically destroying what, in effect, was the entire Iraqi civilization. But their support and design of an occupation policy included the total dismemberment of the Iraqi state apparatus and recruitment of Israeli advisers to provide their ‘expertise’ in interrogation techniques, repression of civilian resistance and counter-insurgency. Israeli expertise certainly played a role in fomenting the intra-Iraqi religious and ethnic strife, which Israel had mastered in Palestine. The Israeli ‘model’ of colonial war and occupation – the invasion of Lebanon in 1982 – and the practice of ‘total destruction’ using sectarian, ethno-religious division was evident in the notorious massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut, which took place under Israeli military supervision.

The second powerful political force behind the Iraq War were civilian militarists (like Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney) who sought to extend US imperial reach in the Persian Gulf and strengthen its geo-political position by eliminating a strong, secular, nationalist backer of Arab anti-imperialist insurgency in the Middle East. The civilian militarists sought to extend the American military base encirclement of Russia and secure control over Iraqi oil reserves as a pressure point against China. The civilian militarists were less moved by Vice President Cheney’s past ties with the oil industry and more interested in his role as CEO of Halliburton’s giant military base contractor subsidiary Kellogg-Brown and Root, which was consolidating the US Empire through worldwide military base expansion. Major US oil companies, who feared losing out to European and Asian competitors, were already eager to deal with Saddam Hussein, and some of the Bush’s supporters in the oil industry had already engaged in illegal trading with the embargoed Iraqi regime. The oil industry was not inclined to promote regional instability with a war.

The militarist strategy of conquest and occupation was designed to establish a long-term colonial military presence in the form of strategic military bases with a significant and sustained contingent of colonial military advisors and combat units. The brutal colonial occupation of an independent secular state with a strong nationalist history and an advanced infrastructure with a sophisticated military and police apparatus, extensive public services and wide-spread literacy naturally led to the growth of a wide array of militant and armed anti-occupation movements. In response, US colonial officials, the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agencies devised a ‘divide and rule’ strategy (the so-called ‘El Salvador solution’ associated with the former ‘hot-spot’ Ambassador and US Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte) fomenting armed sectarian-based conflicts and promoting inter-religious assassinations to debilitate any effort at a united nationalist anti-imperialist movement. The dismantling of the secular civilian bureaucracy and military was designed by the Zionists in the Bush Administration to enhance Israel’s power in the region and to encourage the rise of militant Islamic groups, which had been repressed by the deposed Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. Israel had mastered this strategy earlier: It originally sponsored and financed sectarian Islamic militant groups, like Hamas, as an alternative to the secular Palestine Liberation Organization and set the stage for sectarian fighting among the Palestinians.

The result of US colonial policies were to fund and multiply a wide range of internal conflicts as mullahs, tribal leaders, political gangsters, warlords, expatriates and death squads proliferated. The ‘war of all against all’ served the interests of the US occupation forces. Iraq became a pool of armed, unemployed young men, from which to recruit a new mercenary army. The ‘civil war’ and ‘ethnic conflict’ provided a pretext for the US and its Iraqi puppets to discharge hundreds of thousands of soldiers, police and functionaries from the previous regime (especially if they were from Sunni, mixed or secular families) and to undermine the basis for civilian employment. Under the cover of generalized ‘war against terror’, US Special Forces and CIA-directed death squads spread terror within Iraqi civil society, targeting anyone suspected of criticizing the puppet government – especially among the educated and professional classes, precisely the Iraqis most capable of re-constructing an independent secular republic.

The Iraq war was driven by an influential group of neo-conservative and neo-liberal ideologues with strong ties to Israel. They viewed the success of the Iraq war (by success they meant the total dismemberment of the country) as the first ‘domino’ in a series of war to ‘re-colonize’ the Middle East (in their words: “to re-draw the map”). They disguised their imperial ideology with a thin veneer of rhetoric about ‘promoting democracies’ in the Middle East (excluding, of course, the un-democratic policies of their ‘homeland’ Israel over its subjugated Palestinians). Conflating Israeli regional hegemonic ambitions with the US imperial interests, the neo-conservatives and their neo-liberal fellow travelers in the Democratic Party first backed President Bush and later President Obama in their escalation of the wars against Afghanistan and Pakistan. They unanimously supported Israel’s savage bombing campaign against Lebanon, the land and air assault and massacre of thousands of civilians trapped in Gaza, the bombing of Syrian facilities and the big push (from Israel) for a pre-emptive, full-scale military attack against Iran.

The US advocates of sequential and multiple simultaneous wars in the Middle East and South Asia believed that they could only unleash the full strength of their mass destructive power after they had secured total control of their first victim, Iraq. They were confident that Iraqi resistance would collapse rapidly after 13 years of brutal starvation sanctions imposed on the republic by the US and United Nations. In order to consolidate imperial control, American policy-makers decided to permanently silence all independent Iraqi civilian dissidents. They turned to the financing of Shia clerics and Sunni tribal assassins, and contracting scores of thousands of private mercenaries among the Kurdish Peshmerga warlords to carry out selective assassinations of leaders of civil society movements.

The US created and trained a 200,000 member Iraqi colonial puppet army composed almost entirely of Shia gunmen, and excluded experienced Iraqi military men from secular, Sunni or Christian backgrounds. A little known result of this build up of American trained and financed death squads and its puppet ‘Iraqi’ army, was the virtual destruction of the ancient Iraqi Christian population, which was displaced, its churches bombed and its leaders, bishops and intellectuals, academics and scientists assassinated or driven into exile. The US and its Israeli advisers were well aware that Iraqi Christians had played a key role the historic development of the secular, nationalist, anti-British/anti-monarchist movements and their elimination as an influential force during the first years of US occupation was no accident. The result of the US policies were to eliminate most secular democratic anti-imperialist leaders and movements and to present their murderous net-work of ‘ethno-religious’ collaborators as their uncontested ‘partners’ in sustaining the long-term US colonial presence in Iraq. With their puppets in power, Iraq would serve as a launching platform for its strategic pursuit of the other ‘dominoes’ (Syria, Iran, Central Asian Republics…).

The sustained bloody purge of Iraq under US occupation resulted in the killing 1.3 million Iraqi civilians during the first 7 years after Bush invaded in March 2003. Up to mid-2009, the invasion and occupation of Iraq has officially cost the American treasury over $666 billion. This enormous expenditure attests to its centrality in the larger US imperial strategy for the entire Middle East/South and Central Asia region. Washington’s policy of politicizing and militarizing ethno-religious differences, arming and encouraging rival tribal, religious and ethnic leaders to engage in mutual bloodletting served to destroy national unity and resistance. The ‘divide and rule’ tactics and reliance on retrograde social and religious organizations is the commonest and best-known practice in pursuing the conquest and subjugation of a unified, advanced nationalist state. Breaking up the national state, destroying nationalist consciousness and encouraging primitive ethno-religious, feudal and regional loyalties required the systematic destruction of the principal purveyors of nationalist consciousness, historical memory and secular, scientific thought. Provoking ethno-religious hatreds destroyed intermarriages, mixed communities and institutions with their long-standing personal friendships and professional ties among diverse backgrounds. The physical elimination of academics, writers, teachers, intellectuals, scientists and professionals, especially physicians, engineers, lawyers, jurists and journalists was decisive in imposing ethno-religious rule under a colonial occupation. To establish long-term dominance and sustain ethno-religious client rulers, the entire pre-existing cultural edifice, which had sustained an independent secular nationalist state, was physically destroyed by the US and its Iraqi puppets. This included destroying the libraries, census bureaus, and repositories of all property and court records, health departments, laboratories, schools, cultural centers, medical facilities and above all the entire scientific-literary-humanistic social scientific class of professionals. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi professionals and family members were driven by terror into internal and external exile. All funding for national, secular, scientific and educational institutions were cut off. Death squads engaged in the systematic murder of thousands of academics and professionals suspected of the least dissent, the least nationalist sentiment; anyone with the least capacity to re-construct the republic was marked.

The Destruction of a Modern Arab Civilization

Independent, secular Iraq had the most advanced scientific-cultural order in the Arab world, despite the repressive nature of Saddam Hussein’s police state. There was a system of national health care, universal public education and generous welfare services, combined with unprecedented levels of gender equality. This marked the advanced nature of Iraqi civilization in the late 20th century. Separation of church and state and strict protection of religious minorities (Christians, Assyrians and others) contrasts sharply with what has resulted from the US occupation and its destruction of the Iraqi civil and governmental structures. The harsh dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein thus presided over a highly developed modern civilization in which advanced scientific work went hand in hand with a strong nationalist and anti-imperialist identity. This resulted especially in the Iraqi people and regime’s expressions of solidarity for the plight of the Palestinian people under Israeli rule and occupation.

A mere ‘regime change’ could not extirpate this deeply embedded and advanced secular republican culture in Iraq. The US war planners and their Israeli advisers were well aware that colonial occupation would increase Iraqi nationalist consciousness unless the secular nation was destroyed and hence, the imperial imperative to uproot and destroy the carriers of nationalist consciousness by physically eliminating the educated, the talented, the scientific, indeed the most secular elements of Iraqi society. Retrogression became the principal instrument for the US to impose its colonial puppets, with their primitive, ‘pre-national’ loyalties, in power in a culturally purged Baghdad stripped of its most sophisticated and nationalistic social strata.

According to the Al-Ahram Studies Center in Cairo, more that 310 Iraqi scientists were eliminated during the first 18 months of the US occupation – a figure that the Iraqi education ministry did not dispute.

Another report listed the killings of more than 340 intellectuals and scientists between 2005 and 2007. Bombings of institutes of higher education had pushed enrollment down to 30% of the pre-invasion figures. In one bombing in January 2007, at Baghdad’s Mustansiriya University 70 students were killed with hundreds wounded. These figures compelled the UNESCO to warn that Iraq’s university system was on the brink of collapse. The numbers of prominent Iraqi scientists and professionals who have fled the country have approached 20,000. Of the 6,700 Iraqi university professors who fled since 2003, the Los Angeles Times reported than only 150 had returned by October 2008. Despite the US claims of improved security, the situation in 2008 saw numerous assassinations, including the only practicing neurosurgeon in Iraq’s second largest city of Basra, whose body was dumped on the city streets.

The raw data on the Iraqi academics, scientists and professionals assassinated by the US and allied occupation forces and the militias and shadowy forces they control is drawn from a list published by the Pakistan Daily News on November 26, 2008. This list makes for very uncomfortable reading into the reality of systematic elimination of intellectuals in Iraq under the meat-grinder of US occupation.

Assassinations

The physical elimination of an individual by assassination is an extreme form of terrorism, which has far-reaching effects rippling throughout the community from which the individual comes – in this case the world of Iraqi intellectuals, academics, professionals and creative leaders in the arts and sciences. For each Iraqi intellectual murdered, thousands of educated Iraqis fled the country or abandoned their work for safer, less vulnerable activity.

Baghdad was considered the ‘Paris’ of the Arab world, in terms of culture and art, science and education. In the 1970’s and 80’s, its universities were the envy of the Arab world. The US ‘shock and awe’ campaign that rained down on Baghdad evoked emotions akin to an aerial bombardment of the Louvre, the Sorbonne and the greatest libraries of Europe. Baghdad University was one of the most prestigious and productive universities in the Arab world. Many of its academics possessed doctoral degrees and engaged in post-doctoral studies abroad at prestigious institutions. It taught and graduated many of the top professionals and scientists in the Middle East. Even under the deadly grip of the US/UN-imposed economic sanctions that starved Iraq during the 13 years before the March 2003 invasion, thousands of graduate students and young professionals came to Iraq for post-graduate training. Young physicians from throughout the Arab world received advanced medical training in its institutions. Many of its academics presented scientific papers at major international conferences and published in prestigious journals. Most important, Baghdad University trained and maintained a highly respected scientific secular culture free of sectarian discrimination – with academics from all ethnic and religious backgrounds.

This world has been forever shattered: Under US occupation, up to November 2008, eighty-three academics and researchers teaching at Baghdad University had been murdered and several thousand of their colleagues, students and family members were forced to flee.

The Selection of Assassinated Academics by Discipline

The November 2008 article published by the Pakistan Daily News lists the names of a total of 154 top Baghdad-based academics, renowned in their fields, who were murdered. Altogether, a total of 281 well-known intellectuals teaching at the top universities in Iraq fell victim to the ‘death squads’ under US occupation.

Prior to the US occupation, Baghdad University possessed the premier research and teaching medical faculty in the entire Middle East attracting hundreds of young doctors for advanced training. That program has been devastated during the rise of the US-death squad regime, with few prospects of recovery. Of those murdered, 25% (21) were the most senior professors and lecturers in the medical faculty of Baghdad University, the highest percentage of any faculty. The second highest percentage of butchered faculty were the professors and researchers from Baghdad University’s renowned engineering faculty (12), followed by the top academics in the humanities (10), physical and social sciences (8 senior academics each), education (5). The remaining top academics murdered at Baghdad University spread out among the agronomy, business, physical education, communications and religious studies faculties.

At three other Baghdad universities, 53 senior academics were slaughtered, including 10 in the social sciences, 7 in the faculty of law, 6 each in medicine and the humanities, 9 in the physical sciences and 5 in engineering. Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s August 20, 2002 pre-invasion joke, “…one has to assume they (scientists) have not been playing ‘tiddlywinks’(a child’s game)” justifying the bloody purge of Iraq’s scientists in physics and chemistry. An ominous signal of the academic bloodletting that followed the invasion.

Similar bloody purges of academics occurred in all the provincial universities: 127 senior academics and scientists were assassinated at the various well-regarded universities in Mosul, Kirkuk, Basra and elsewhere. The provincial universities with the highest number of murdered senior faculty members were in cities where the US and British military and their Kurdish mercenary allies were most active: Basra (35), Mosul (35), Diyala (15) and Al-Anbar (11).

The Iraqi military and allied death squads carried out most of the killing of academics in the cities under US or ‘allied’ control. The systematic murder of academics was a nation-wide, cross-disciplinary drive to destroy the cultural and educational foundations of a modern Arab civilization. The death squads carrying out most of these assassinations were primitive, pre-modern, ethno-religious groups ‘set loose’ or instrumentalized by US military strategists to wipe out any politically conscious intellectuals and nationalist scientists who might pursue an agenda for re-building a modern, secular society and independent, unified republic.

In its panic to prevent the US invasion, the Iraqi National Monitoring Directorate provided a list, which identified over 500 key Iraqi scientists to the UN on December 7, 2002. There is little doubt that this list became a core element in the US military’s hit list for eliminating Iraq’s scientific elite. In his notorious pre-invasion speech to the United Nations, Secretary of State Colin Powell cited a list of over 3,500 Iraqi scientists and technicians who would have to be ‘contained’ to prevent their expertise from being used by other countries. The US had even created a ‘budget’ of hundreds of millions of dollars, drawn from the Iraqi ‘Oil for Food’ money held by the United Nations to set up ‘civilian re-education’ programs to re-train Iraqi scientists and engineers. These highly touted programs were never seriously implemented. Cheaper ways of containing what one American policy expert termed Iraq’s ‘excess scientists, engineers and technicians’ in a Carnegie Endowment Paper (RANSAC Policy Update April 2004) became clear. The US had decided to adopt and expand the Israeli Mossad’s covert operation of assassinating selected key Iraqi scientists on an industrial scale.

The US ‘Surge’ and ‘Peak Assassination’ Campaigns: 2006-2007

The high tide of terror against academics coincides with the renewal of the US military offensive in Baghdad and in the provinces. Of the total number of assassinations of Baghdad-based academics for which a date is recorded (110 known intellectuals slaughtered), almost 80% (87) occurred in 2006 and 2007. A similar pattern is found in the provinces with 77% of a total of 84 scholars murdered outside of capital during the same period. The pattern is clear: the murder rate of academics grows as the occupying US forces organize a mercenary Iraqi military and police force and provide money for the training and recruitment of rival Shia and Sunni tribesmen and militia as a means of decreasing American casualties and of purging potential dissident critics of the occupation.

The terror campaign against academics intensified in mid-2005 and reached its peak in 2006-2007, leading to the mass flight of tens of thousands of Iraqi scholars, scientists, professionals and their families overseas. Entire university medical school faculties have become refugees in Syria and elsewhere. Those who could not afford to abandon elderly parents or relatives and remained in Iraq have taken extraordinary measures to hide their identities. Some have chosen to collaborate with the US occupation forces or the puppet regime in the hope of being protected or allowed to immigrate with their families to the US or Europe, although the Europeans, especially the British are disinclined to accept Iraqi scholars. After 2008, there has been a sharp decline in the murder of academics – with only 4 assassinated that year. This reflects the massive flight of Iraqi intellectuals living abroad or in hiding rather than any change of policy on the part of the US and its mercenary puppets. As a result, Iraq’s research facilities have been decimated. The lives of those remaining support staff, including technicians, librarians and students have been devastated with few prospects for future employment.

The US war and occupation of Iraq, as Presidents Bush and Obama have declared, is a ‘success’ – an independent nation of 23 million citizens has been occupied by force, a puppet regime is ensconced, colonial mercenary troops obey American officers and the oil fields have been put up for sale. All of Iraq’s nationalist laws protecting its patrimony, its cultural treasures and national resources, have been annulled. The occupiers have imposed a ‘constitution’ favoring the US Empire. Israel and its Zionist flunkies in the Administrations of both Bush and Obama celebrate the demise of a modern adversary… and the conversion of Iraq into a cultural-political desert. In line with an alleged agreement made by the US State Department and Pentagon officials to influential collectors from the American Council for Cultural Policy in January 2003, the looted treasures of ancient Mesopotamia have ‘found’ their way into the collections of the elite in London, New York and elsewhere. The collectors can now anticipate the pillage of Iran.

Warning to Iran

The US invasion, occupation and destruction of a modern, scientific-cultural civilization, such as existed in Iraq, is a prelude of what the people of Iran can expect if and when a US-Israeli military attack occurs. The imperial threat to the cultural-scientific foundations of the Iranian nation has been totally absent from the narrative among the affluent Iranian student protesters and their US-funded NGO’s during their post-election ‘Lipstick Revolution’ protests. They should bear in mind that in 2004 educated, sophisticated Iraqis in Baghdad consoled themselves with a fatally misplaced optimism that ‘at least we are not like Afghanistan’. The same elite are now in squalid refugee camps in Syria and Jordan and their country more closely resembles Afghanistan than anywhere else in the Middle East. The chilling promise of President Bush in April 2003 to transform Iraq in the image of ‘our newly liberated Afghanistan’ has been fulfilled. And reports that the US Administration advisers had reviewed the Israeli Mossad policy of selective assassination of Iranian scientists should cause the pro-Western liberal intellectuals of Tehran to seriously ponder the lesson of the murderous campaign that has virtually eliminated Iraqi scientists and academics during 2006-2007.

Conclusion

What does the United States (and Britain and Israel) gain from establishing a retrograde client regime, based on medieval ethno-clerical socio-political structures in Iraq? First and foremost, Iraq has become an outpost for empire. Secondly, it is a weak and backward regime incapable of challenging Israeli economic and military dominance in the region and unwilling to question the ongoing ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinian Arabs from Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. Thirdly, the destruction of the scientific, academic, cultural and legal foundations of an independent state means increasing reliance on the Western (and Chinese) multinational corporations and their technical infrastructure – facilitating imperial economic penetration and exploitation.

In the mid 19th Century, after the revolutions of 1848, the conservative French sociologist Emil Durkheim recognized that the European bourgeoisie was confronted with rising class conflict and an increasing anti-capitalist working class. Durkheim noted that, whatever its philosophical misgivings about religion and clericalism, the bourgeoisie would have to use the myths of traditional religion to ‘create’ social cohesion and undercut class polarization. He called on the educated and sophisticated Parisian capitalist class to forgo its rejection of obscurantist religious dogma in favor of instrumentalizing religion as a tool to maintain its political dominance. In the same way, US strategists, including the Pentagon-Zionists, have instrumentalized the tribal-mullah, ethno-religious forces to destroy the secular national political leadership and advanced culture of Iraq in order to consolidate imperial rule – even if this strategy called for the killing off of the scientific and professional classes. Contemporary US imperial rule is based on supporting the socially and politically most backward sectors of society and applying the most advanced technology of warfare.

Israeli advisers have played a major role in instructing US occupation forces in Iraq on the practices of urban counter-insurgency and repression of civilians, drawing on their 60 years of experience. The infamous massacre of hundreds of Palestinian families at Deir Yasin in 1948 was emblematic of Zionist elimination of hundreds of productive farming villages, which had been settled for centuries by a native people with their endogenous civilization and cultural ties to the soil, in order to impose a new colonial order. The policy of the total deracination of the Palestinians is central to Israel’s advise to the US policymakers in Iraq. Their message has been carried out by their Zionist acolytes in the Bush and Obama Administrations, ordering the dismemberment of the entire modern Iraqi civil and state bureaucracy and using pre-modern tribal death squads made up of Kurds and Shia extremists to purge the modern universities and research institutions of that shattered nation.

The US imperial conquest of Iraq is built on the destruction of a modern secular republic. The cultural desert that remains (a Biblical ‘howling wilderness’ soaked in the blood of Iraq’s precious scholars) is controlled by mega-swindlers, mercenary thugs posing as ‘Iraqi officers’, tribal and ethnic cultural illiterates and medieval religious figures. They operate under the guidance and direction of West Point graduates holding ‘blue-prints for empire’, formulated by graduates of Princeton, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Yale and Chicago, eager to serve the interests of American and European multi-national corporations.

This is called ‘combined and uneven development’: The marriage of fundamentalist mullahs with Ivy League Zionists at the service of the US.

James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50-year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed Books). Petras’ most recent book is The Arab Revolt and the Imperialist Counterattack. He can be reached at: jpetras@binghamton.edu. Read other articles by James, or visit James's website.

209 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. rosemarie jackowski said on August 21st, 2009 at 10:16am #

    Didn’t the US start the Iraq War in 1991????????

  2. Michael Dawson said on August 21st, 2009 at 10:52am #

    “The US imperial conquest of Iraq is built on the destruction of a modern secular republic.”

    WTF? Why is DV publishing this verbose, insane garbage?

    Saddam Hussein was a CIA agent who rose to power by overthrowing General Qassim and the Iraqi Republic. One would think somebody who “owns” a 50-year membership in the class struggle might be aware of that, as well as of the ridicule he invites onto the left by painting Hussein as a flawed good guy.

    Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer and an agent of Washington until he made the mistake of taking April Glaspie’s advice.

    Jesus!

  3. Michael Kenny said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:07am #

    Small point of fact: Assyrians are orthodox Christians. The other large Christian group in Iraq are the Catholic Chaldeans, whose patriarch is Cardinal Delly.
    Also, I don’t buy the “empire” idea. US foreign policy is Israel-driven, not empire-driven. A more logical explanation therefore is the desire to install Israel-friendly regimes in the latter’s near neighbourhood. First, Afghanistan, which, being land-locked, automatically involved the co-operation of Pakistan. Then, Iraq, followed by a pincer movement from both sides into Iran. Then westward into Syria. With Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Egypt considered “pro-American” (sic!), that eliminated all potential threats to Israel.

  4. dan e said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:16am #

    Rosemary, Petras says “seven year war and occupation”. His main concern in this article seems to be what resulted from the occupation, that is the total destruction of Iraq’s social fabric. Yes, Iraqi society was badly damaged by Bush One’s war and Clinton’s genocidal sanctions, but it took Bush II’s “infantrymen on the objective” to enable the Pol Pot-style total cultural genocide Petras describes.
    Overall in my view it’s a magnificent description and analysis. A couple pts I expected to see included but didn’t would have been a mention of how Cointelpro was used to destroy the Black Liberation/Civil Rights movement in the US, how divisions and internal strife was sown between groups who had no real material differences; another would have been to note that the main non-Jewish neocons like Rumsfeld and Cheney had been indocrinated by Leo Strauss into his ne0-Jabotinskian “murderous realism” world outlook, which undoubtedly was why they were selected for advancement by the ZPC’s top echelon.
    It might be helpful to notice that Petras is now among the writers published on Global Research dot ca, which site was the first to publish details of the halfmillion child deaths which resulted from Bill Clinton’s bombing of Iraq’s water infrastructure. So I don’t think there’s any material disagreement between you, Rosemary, and Petras about US military assaults on Iraq; IMHO he just wanted to focus on some aspects that are seldom discussed even in “antiwar” circles.

  5. dan e said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:26am #

    Having just mentionedwww.globalresearch.ca, I’ve decided to follow impulse and post this here, instead of on that long but now ancient thread where Max S & I were differing on some of the matters covered in the article I comment on before posting the link to the full article:
    [this is a brilliant essay by a writer who attacks globalized capitalism from a point of view aligned with the social strata intermediate between the property-less workingclass/proletariat and the "supra"-capitalist global Ruling Class, that is what are often loosely called "the middle classes". He takes off from "neo-Gramscism", a school of thought which derives its terminology & categories from the prison writings of Antonio Gramsci, head of the Italian Communist Party prior to the consolidation of power by Mussolini's Fascist regime. Despite Gramsci's Marxist-Leninist background, while in prison he concealed the revolutionary thrust of his ideas by using euphemisms in place of the traditional Marxist categories; thus Marx's "proletariat" became "the Modern Prince" evoking Machiavelli; Lenin's "worker-peasant alliance" became "the subaltern groups" and so on. The resulting fuzziness has been welcomed by theorists loyal to "the new petite bourgeoisie" (cf. N. Poulantzas) anxious to express opposition to the worst aspects of the current global order but unwilling to align themselves with those most victimized by it.
    I find this writer's approach refreshing; instead of posing as "the vanguard of the proletariat" as do most other petit-bourgeois intellectual leftists, he openly identifies with the Intermediate Strata. Since people like me here at or near the bottom of the status/wealth/power ladder are going to be ruled by one oligarchy or another, my guess is we'll be better off with a group in charge who aren't trying to kid us that their interests are identical to ours, that they're just like us, only smarter. --dan]

    Global War and Dying Democracy: The Revolution of the Elites
    Global Power and Global Government: Part 5

    By Andrew Gavin Marshall

    URL of this article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14839

    Global Research, August 19, 2009

    This article is the 5th and final part in the series, “Global Power and Global Government,” published by Global Research.

    Part 1: Global Power and Global Government: Evolution and Revolution of the Central Banking System
    Part 2: Origins of the American Empire: Revolution, World Wars and World Order
    Part 3: Controlling the Global Economy: Bilderberg, the Trilateral Commission and the Federal Reserve
    Part 4: Forging a “New World Order” Under a One World Government
    (snip)

    ——————————————————————————–

    Transnational Totalitarianism

    Global trends in political economy suggest that “democracy” as we know it, is a fading concept, where even Western industrialized nations are retreating from the system. Arguably, through party politics and financial-corporate interests, democracy is something of a façade as it is. However, we are entering into an era in which even the institutions and image of democracy are in retreat, and the slide into totalitarianism seems inevitable.

  6. dan e said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:39am #

    Michael Dawson,
    appreciate your sentiments, but it seems you have such a firm grip on some parts of the “elephant” that you miss others. It is a fact that Saddam was a willing tool of the Pentagon et al, that he launched an invasion of Iran on US orders, that he brutally repressed any opposition to the regime he headed. Other crimes of his regime could be listed as well.
    But it is also a fact that Iraq under Saddam was the most advanced, most prosperous and best for the average citizen, and especially for the average woman, to live in of all the Arab countries.
    I’m sorry Michael, but to an extent you seem to be regurgiting Bush Regime propaganda they used to justify their invasion/occupation/Shocknawe. Please think about it?

  7. dan e said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:51am #

    M. Kenny is at it again, sowing confusion. Suggestion for you, MK: read a few of Petras’ articles attacking the Zionist Power Configuration? Or better yet at least skim some his recent books dealing with “The Power of Israel in the US” and related topics?

    Let us attempt to be clear: while the top echelon Zionists may be the main beneficiaries and main deciders of US foreign and military policy, the main State Apparatus able to enforce the implementation of these policies is based in the USA.

    Please recognize that it is Chomsky and ilk who would have you think that the mainspring of US aggression is Big Oil, and that the role of the Israel Lobby is so minor as to not merit mention. On the record, it is Petras who has repeatedly challenged such views, and done so according to the most rigorous scholarly standards.

  8. Shabnam said on August 21st, 2009 at 11:54am #

    Kenny: I am writing about ‘greater Israel’ for the last 2 years and half at this site. The accurate geography for “greater Israel” is from Mauritania to Afghanistan including North Africa that you have eliminated completely. What is happening in Sudan, Somalia, Morocco and the rest of the region is part of Israel ‘s plan where is implemented by Jewish lobby and its different Zionist PUPPETS WHITE AND BLACK as president in Washington, Where Jewish Lobby started its COMPLETE DOMINATION of Washington in fu**ing Clinton administration. In fact, Iraq war started during the fu**ing Clinton administration, bill and Hillary are 100 percent Zionist puppets. Dual containment was designed by a zionist Jew by the name of Martin Indyk from Jewish lobby where killed more than 650,000 Iraqi before invasion of Iraq, of whom many were children and was viewed by the zionist agent , Mad Albright, as necessary step towards complete destruction and partition of Iraq to create pawns like Kurds who are trained and armed by the fu**ing Zionists in Israel and many Israeli Jews have ‘bought’ land in north of Iraq with the cooperation of a puppet and a petty agent, Barezani , to be used as the first step for future stealing of Iraq by the Zionist Jews like what had happened in Palestine in the beginning of the 20th century after the demise of the Ottoman empire by British and active role of Rothschild family and their close agents, the Jews in Salonika who were active in destabilization of Ottoman like TODAY. Rothschild family, like the neocon, shaped the British Empire’s policy in the Middle East.

  9. B99 said on August 21st, 2009 at 1:49pm #

    The US DOES have state interests in Middle East other than Israel. As it happens, and it is no accident, US and Israeli interests mesh quite well. Generally speaking, for Israel, the goal is to impede Arab unity, and to a somewhat lesser extent, Muslim unity. Israel attacked Egypt in 1956 in order to destroy Gamal Nasser, who advocated Pan-Arabism. By the same token, Israel enjoys any and all divisiveness between Sunni and Shia – they joined with the US in prolonging the Iraq-Iran war. And Jews are championing the campaign against Sudan regarding he mass deaths in Darfur, to the extent none would dream of if the situation had been in Congo or Rwanda.

    However, the US envisions itself as Britain’s Near East successor as the region’s hegemon. The US collapses without petroleum – and while not all oil is in the Middle East – control over Middle Eastern oil is essential. The US used to have allies in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. They have lost the first two and when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, the US was about to lose a third – there’s no way the US was going to permit the pricing and supply of Kuwaiti oil to be turned over to Iraq. Hence the invasion. This it would do even if Israel fell into the Mediterranean. Of course, ANY attack by the US of ANY Arab state is applauded by Israel, and replacing Saddam was a particular joy for them. Nonetheless, oil states not controlled by the US are subject to increasing pressure by China. We don’t need Israel in the equation to know that’s a non-starter for the US. The Great Game continues.

  10. bozh said on August 21st, 2009 at 2:04pm #

    every US aggression presaged another imminent aggression. Invasion of iraq and its puppetization presage another aggression and puppetization of either syria or iran.

    iraq, pak’n, and afgh’n are evil empires set up thus by other evil and long-seeing empires.
    Evil empires can be held together only by oppression and violence. This fact seriously weakens such empires and in case of iraq with ist aggression of iran in ?79, kurdish rebelion during that aggression was put dwn by chemical weapons.

    i cld have used the label “disfunctional” empires, instead of “evil” empires. And iraq was more disfunctional than most other disfuncional empires such as india and pak’n.

    iran is also disfunctional. It is held together by oppression. Both kurds and azeris can be used to seriously weaken or even dismember iran from within.
    I expect that after iran is de facto dismembered and puppetized like iraq had been, US and europe is on march for ‘stans.
    If world plutos do not want to destroy even vestiges of socialism nor obtain the planet or as much as possible of it, why then all this warfare?
    Of course, world plutos will not tell us what the telos is; perforce, we can only guess.
    my guess is, world plutos, and not just american, want also russia or russsian plutos onside.
    So, it is up to russians to ensure that russian plutos do not ever get a grip on rule of russia as US plutos have on the rule of US.
    and if russia goes western, it is all over for china; self being a disfunctional empire.
    and plutos millennial quest for utter control wld finally be realized.
    I hope my devil then springs to acion and sends dozens of large meteorites to rain on plutos’ heads.
    Or, may be, there may be a god! But we need that evil and dumb bastard right now! Or may be not? As he might make it even worse! tnx

  11. Michael Dawson said on August 21st, 2009 at 2:30pm #

    Dan e, I’m not regurgitating Bush excuses. Quite the contrary. I’m pointing out that Iraq under Saddam was not a republic but a dictatorship, and also that the era of Iraqi secular democracy was ended, not extended, by Saddam Hussein. Those are just elementary facts.

    The left ought to be going back to Qassim and Nasser and Mossadegh, not making excuses for a brutal demagogic thug and thief like Hussein.

    In no way does telling the truth about Hussein justify the U.S. war. But painting Hussein as a flawed good guy is stupid and disgusting and a massive disservice to the class struggle. Saddam Hussein was an enemy of the left, and of human decency in general.

    P.S. Saying Iraq had the best conditions for women in the Middle East is neither a reason to like Hussein nor much of a contest.

  12. dan e said on August 21st, 2009 at 2:43pm #

    B99, you make a lot of sense, as usual. But what is this entity you call “the US”?
    I think we need more clarity re what we actually mean to denote by the nouns we use. Else we fall into fallacious thinking, such as operating on the assumption that “the US” is a “pluralist democracy” like they teach in high school.
    Are we certain that the “US Interests” in the ME apart from the state interests of Israel are not the economic and power interests of the same people who provide the bulk of the support for the “israel lobby”?
    Wall St “streetlevel” opinion these days has it that Goldman Sachs is the biggest player in the Energy Market, the biggest speculator responsible for the oil price spike. So until we get some information which identifies exactly which “goyish” interests exist which are distinct from the Zionist Power Configuration, and some exigesis of how they exert their power independently of the ZPC, I think as a rule of thumb we can assume that no “US interests” exist which can persist if found to be contrary to what the ZPC wants.
    Does that make sense to you?
    Well, come to think of it, obviously somebody with some clout in US politics/backroom dealing is not enthusiastic about bombing Iran any time soon. So I’ve just debunked my own proposition, at least partially… ??

  13. Don Hawkins said on August 21st, 2009 at 2:44pm #

    We could thing of ourselves as little meteorites and what would be the best way to rain down upon there heads? It’s a very tuff choice and sacrifice is needed better for us in many way’s well a lot of way’s. The mind would be more at ease and purpose is a good feeling. Stop buying there stuff weather that be in material form or the bullshit they peddle. I know to simple. Probably only get half the people in the States to go along and the other half would still get stuff and of that half maybe 10% a lot of stuff. Come to think of it that is the way it is now anyway. Well California with 11.9% unemployment and many other States in the same boat make that 70% as a start.

  14. russell olausen said on August 21st, 2009 at 3:00pm #

    For some reason I believed the world a kinder place than it is.This reminds me of a book, (an English interpretation of Buddhism as practiced in Ceylon circa 1900) that described the various tortures that could be visited on a perceived miscreant by the prevailing ruler of the land.Intelligent people with a desire to shape their destiny are very likely to receive such punishments as the article points out so well.The veneer of civilization got a thin coat after Korea but naked conquest is now the vogue.The reductionist question is, identity or death, as always.

  15. Suthiano said on August 21st, 2009 at 3:25pm #

    Yes Americans are going to have to deeply, honestly question identity at this point (should have happened long ago).

    Perhaps “America” must be deconstructed before anything like what “America” was “supposed to be” could come into existence. Maybe the country needs to be divided. I don’t think people can reclaim whole thing. Pockets of resistance will be the only way. California, Michigan would be a good places to start. The country’s already abandoned large parts of these states.

    Don’t wait any longer. Rain baby rain.

  16. Suthiano said on August 21st, 2009 at 3:27pm #

    “country’s” should read “plutos have”

  17. B99 said on August 21st, 2009 at 3:53pm #

    By US I mean the State. So I’m referring to US state interests – usually as conducted by the executive branch including the State Dept. Not necessarily the interests of the American people, in fact, usually contrary to the true interests of Americans.

    I think we have to assume that the US – which as the global superpower, has interests all over the globe, also has interests in the Middle East. I mean, it stands to reason that it does. These interests pre-date the establishment of Israel – the agreements between the Saud family and Roosevelt regarding oil are major events in history. Certainly there is tension in the policy between the ‘Orientalists’ at the State Dept. – a group on the long term wane, and the Israel-Firsters, a group that has increased its power at their expense. Nonetheless, I think there is largely a convergence of interests between the two groups. But if Israel could have its way, there would be few, if any, AWACS and other military hardware being sold to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc. I would agree that there are people in the Obama Admin (including Obama himself) who are dead set against bombing Iran. But Israel and its supporters play geopolitical chess very well, it remains to be seen if they will back Obama into a corner on this.

  18. Don Hawkins said on August 21st, 2009 at 3:59pm #

    Let’s not forget H1N1 in just a few months and now the thinking is doubling every 3 day’s. Of course send your kid’s to school and go to work. That doesn’t seem to be the way it is working in Argentina right now. Somehow I don’t think growth is on the way.

    California, Michigan would be a good places to start. The country’s already abandoned large parts of these states.

    Michigan, Hummm. New Michigan.

  19. B99 said on August 21st, 2009 at 4:14pm #

    You are right Michael Dawson – there is no reason for anyone to celebrate Saddam Hussein.

  20. Mulga Mumblebrain said on August 21st, 2009 at 4:44pm #

    As the destruction of Iraq proceeds, as a whole people are driven into poverty and misery, with deliberate, brutal, racist intent, the Right is ecstatic. In this country several leading military figures who worked closely with the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, and who, in my opinion, are clearly war criminals by any reading of international law, are now darlings of the Rightwing media (the only type we have). Their lies and maunderings are broadcast almost daily, and they are very keen on the line that ‘we’ (the West) are ‘moral’, and ‘they’ (any two-legged Arab animal that resists) are ‘evil’. Obviously close contact with Zionists and their fellow travellers, and the usual spineless sycophancy to Yankee power typical of Australian elites is at work.
    As this fine piece makes plain, the Yankee Reich and its ‘brain’, Israel and its Fifth columnists who dominate US politics and the media, have a ‘politicidal’ agenda in mind for the Islamic Middle East. We have the evidence of decades of US and Israeli policy, where ‘decapitation’, ie the destruction of the leading elements in target societies in order to impel a society back to the Dark Ages (along with bombing them back to the Stone Age)has been practised with utmost brutality. Entire generations of Palestinian leaders have been murdered, often with innocent by-standers obliterated as well, with a few collaborationist Quislings like Abbas allowed to live as puppets. The same with the Lebanese Shia, Iraq, and Iran. The religious fundamentalist ideology that increasingly impels Israeli policy sees the murder of enemies not as a necessary evil, but an ecstatic religious duty. Do we need to list all the evidence, the ‘religious’ festivals, like Passover and Purim that celebrate massacres, the injunctions in the Torah to genocide, the speculations as to who, precisely, the Amalek, sentenced by God to annihilation, are. Some Judaic fundamentalists argue that they are the Palestinians, some Arabs as a whole. When one considers the appalling barbarity of Israeli military action, the murderousness, the targeting of women and children and the sickening hypocrisy of the sordid lies that deny everything and insist on a narrative of ‘moral purity’, let’s face it, we are confronted by absolute evil.
    When Israeli state evil meets the even older state evil of the US, and the religious fascists of Israel meet their cousins the Christian Zionist fundamentalist fascists of the US, we are at the dawn of an era of mass murder, possibly unprecedented in history. The recent revelations that Blackwater, the private fascist death-squad deployed in Iraq had been involved in assassination campaigns for the US military, and that the religious fundamentalist extremist owner of Blackwater, Eric Prince, confided to his colleagues that he saw himself as part of a Crusade to eliminate Islam, ought to be front-page news. But with a media utterly dominated by Zionists, that story went straight down the ‘memory-hole’.
    Instead we are incessantly bombarded with Zionist lies. It is the Moslem world attacking the West. The occupation and destruction of several Arab countries and the killing of millions is ignored, or treated as a matter of no import, but God forbid that the ‘two-legged animals’ kill one of ‘us’. Human solidarity and sympathy is absolutely banished. An Israeli type virulent racism rules, where burning children to death with white phosphorus is no concern, but firing rockets at Sderot is the greatest crime since, well, ‘the Holocaust!’.And any who dare object, or point to whence the sewer of anti-Arab racism flows, is silenced or vilified as an ‘anti-Semite’. And now the mere act of criticising this evil, racist, mass murdering apartheid state is to be outlawed, when the Zionists and their stooges get their way, as they inevitably do.
    I think it is plain that the religious/fascist rulers of Israel and the US are intent on global war. The coming energy and ecological crunches mean that the billions of excess population must be culled. The destruction of the Palestinian world, the driving of Iraq back into the Dark Ages, the thirty years of horror in Afghanistan, the destruction of Somalia, the dismemberment of Congo, the threats to Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, the increase in global inequality, the growth in hunger and malnourishment all point to a carefully planned process of marginalising 90% of the global population. Living in vast ghettoes, like the mega-slums grown up around poor world megalopolises these ‘useless eaters’ will be policed and butchered if restless by expeditionary forces, consisting more and more of drones and killer robots. A brutal dystopia, forged in the diseased psyches of psychopaths from race and class hatred and fuelled by the perverse force of religious fundamentalist delusions of universal supremacy. The one thing standing in the way of this global apartheid, forever, is China, which explains the recent upsurge in Sinophobia and the central role of Zionist Jews in propelling the anti-China agenda.

  21. brian said on August 21st, 2009 at 5:15pm #

    anyone remember this little reported event?

    ‘Khaled Bayomi looks surprised when the American officer on TV complains that they don’t have the resources to stop the plundering in Baghdad. “I happened to be right there just as the American troops encouraged people to begin the plundering.”

    Khaled Bayomi traveled from Europe to Baghdad to be a human shield and arrived on the same day that the war began. About this he can tell many stories but the most interesting is certainly his eyewitness account of the wave of plundering.

    “I had gone to see some friends who live near a dilapidated area just past Haifa Avenue on the west bank of the Tigris. It was the 8th of April and the fighting was so intense that I was unable to return to the other side of the river. In the afternoon it became perfectly quiet and four American tanks took places on the edge of the slum area. The soldiers shot two Sudanese guards who stood at their posts outside a local administration building on the other side of Haifa Avenue. Then they blasted apart the doors to the building and from the tanks came eager calls in Arabic encouraging people to come close to them. ”

    “The entire morning, everyone who had tried to cross the road had been shot. But in the strange silence after all the shooting, people gradually became curious. After 45 minutes, the first Baghdad citizens dared to come out. Arab interpreters in the tanks told the people to go and take what they wanted in the building.”
    http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article/article.php?id=546

  22. michael miller said on August 21st, 2009 at 6:24pm #

    When Petras stays within his area of expertise — Latin American history and politics — his writing is often good. But his raving about Zionism is pathetic. Why does DV give him a platform? Can’t you see that this once venerated scholar has gone mad?

  23. Max Shields said on August 21st, 2009 at 8:02pm #

    B99 I agree with your last post.

    To think that US policy which is simply subservient to Zionism shows a total disregard for any sense of US foreign policy and how it’s been shaped and why.

    Zionism is what it is, there is no denying how it has flexed its muscle in within the region, but it is total insanity to see it as the predominate player in US foreign policy however the confluence has come to be between Zionists and those with power in the US.

    I would have to agree also with Mr. Miller (not that Petras is mad) that Petras has a good deal to offer in his analysis of Latin America but has wondered to the side of ludicrous by pushing a Zionist/Israel-firster as the balls behind the Imperial Empire.

    It shows a total lack in appeciating real power.

  24. United-Socialist-Front said on August 21st, 2009 at 8:43pm #

    WHY DO PEOPLE COME TO USA? A GREAT ANALYSIS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNIST PARTY OF USA

    http://rwor.org/a/173/Why_Come_Here-en.html

    Why DO People Come Here? Why do people come to America? Because the capitalist-imperialist system of the United States has messed up the rest of the world even worse than what it has done in this country. One example, among many is Mexico.

    As part of gaining its riches and power, the U.S. has made it impossible for many people to live in their own countries. To get a deeper understanding of how this system works and how it controls and shapes people’s lives, look how it is that immigrants from Mexico end up in the United States…

  25. United-Socialist-Front said on August 21st, 2009 at 8:46pm #

    michael: ? I am sorry but James Petras is right. USA is owned and ruled by Israel. The mad ones are the ignorant millions of americans who vote for Democrats and Republicans every 4 years and who worship celebrities like Britney Spears, Alex Rodriguez, Obama, Clinton, Sarah Palin etc.

    .

  26. Deadbeat said on August 22nd, 2009 at 3:19am #

    Please recognize that it is Chomsky and ilk who would have you think that the mainspring of US aggression is Big Oil, and that the role of the Israel Lobby is so minor as to not merit mention. On the record, it is Petras who has repeatedly challenged such views, and done so according to the most rigorous scholarly standards.

    This bears repeating and also why the Left has lost a great deal of credibility. It was also the primary reason why the “anti-war” movement fell apart. Until Zionism in the United States is seriously confronted and not meekly excused the Left will remain stagnant.

  27. Josie Michel-Brüning said on August 22nd, 2009 at 3:47am #

    Thank you to James Petras for another well funded article.
    And thank you to the extensive comments this article was able to rise.

  28. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 22nd, 2009 at 4:38am #

    land stealers and murderers can be also called “zionists”; none of which have any connection to zion or hebrews, save, of course, ‘religion’.

    However, in christo-talmudic quest for more land and a much weakened islamic world, ‘religion’ is just one factor.
    Lust for wealth and control of weak lands appear to be much stronger factors in waging wars.

    it also seems to me that the ‘jewish zionism’ is of minor import to world plutos and will eventually be disregarded or totally eradicated.
    ‘Zionism’ appears as red herring, but not to most christians and ‘jews’.

    These people may believe that the warfare is about securing the ‘holy’ land for christo-talmudic-mosheic world; while, in fact, plutos care only about maintaining or augmenting their wealth.
    that is their god! tnx

  29. Max Shields said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:29am #

    Deadbeast, “Big Oil”

    Here lies the fallacy of this thinking. It is not simply oil companies who run or drive US foreign policy (and one doesn’t deny a certain Zionist influence) but it is the geopolitical hegemony of which oil plays an incredibly important role.

    That policy was most clearly forged during the Carter administration. Oil is a national security issue and is aligned with the NSC 68 report of 1950. This National Security report has its predecesors and it’s successors, but it has led US foreign policy post WWII.

    There is, no doubt, confluence with this policy and those of Zionists; but to overstate that, as Petras clearly does, is to mock logic and reasoning; and worse, it is to create a red herring that produces bad focused actions for those who wish to find a means to not only analyze the problem, but to discover real solutions.

    Big Oil doesn’t tell the government – “go there and invade this nation or that.” Their influence is implied as much as ever stated. The US foreign policy vis a vis the Middle East was long ago set in motion. It cares not one iota about the leader of Iran or Iraq or Saudi Arabia or Egypt, per se, it cares only about the “chess board” of Middle Eastern geopolitical hegemony for US interests. This was not invented by Chomsky.

    Such policies as drives the US appear on the one hand highly irrational, as is the flexing of massive military power to swat a fly called Al Qaeda. So, it is not that disrupting the oil flow from Iraq was a rational position in the short run, but the establishment of long term basis to secure the entire region was the goal. Whether that plays well or not for Israel is not the central issue. The fact that the Iraq invasion has completely and thorough backfired, is nothing new regarding US policy and their attempts to control territories.

    While it is clear that oil is the very foundation of the US (and Western) civilization, it is not simply a boogey man to hide Zionist influence. It is all to real; and for those who remember the 1970s’ panic, it is a major threat.

    Why Petras keeps writing the same essay over and over again shows some kind of attempt to convince when all he really does is get posters like deadbeat making the same remarks, and posters like Max Shields, the other side.

    Agree/disagree, Petras offers no new insights that he has not tried to make before. Stop beating this dead horse!!!

  30. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:38am #

    Remember the Titanic the movie and then of course what really happened that night. Instead of the Titanic let’s call the boat the Earth it’s a big boat. We are all there 6 billion plus. The boat has three deck’s and of course where the Captain does there thing. Most of us are in what’s called the lower deck. In many way’s the best place to be if you don’t mind the pounding of the engines and the music coming from the deck’s above high above oh so high above. Then the middle deck that used to have less noise but now day’s not much different than the lower deck. Then the upper deck oh boy what a deck. Now on the upper deck everybody has there own room and unlike the lower deck or middle that many sleep on the floor or under a bridge in a tent today right now this second. The food on the upper deck is really good let’s just say it didn’t come from Wal Mart or McDonald’s and prepared by the finest gay chef the in thing to do. The music this evening on the upper deck and the middle and lower deck can’t seem to get away from is Mike Huckabee who has this big smile and drinking a glass of orange juice not from concentrate and his back up singers have on a big white hat and a rather large belt buckle and the song this evening is God bless America and they just keep playing it over and over again. On the upper deck some of the rooms are better than others and the best rooms are for Goldmen Saks and Wall Street in general movie Stars oh and Hannity and Glenn Beck who run around the stage as Huckabee sings God bless America over and over again. There just having fun. Now up in the wheel house this evening are the Captains yes more than one and what are they doing well steering the ship Earth into the abyss and why are they doing this? Well a few people on the middle and lower deck the people on the upper deck are just having fun the best they can figure is because they are just stupid. The Captain from America is humming God bless America and the Captain from China is humming the same song in his language the Indian Captain same and so it goes on the ship Earth third planet from the Sun. Remember the ending of the movie Titanic well this time it’s not a movie and instead of cold water think warm water and drought, flooding, food for millions then billions none and many more little surprises and who get’s the life boat’s the ones that are still there? You get one guess on who the people in the upper deck and wheel house think on that one. Calm at peace and think of this as kind of a war.

  31. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 7:41am #

    Dear Friends commentators of this news website:

    This is not related to the main topic but something to ponder in our lives, i would like to comment about the increase in sexual activities in underage young children in America, specially in the way they dress. Yesterday i went to the supermarket in my car. And around my house i saw 2 little 7 year old girls walking around the sidewalk, not with regular clothes, but with triple XXX rated bikinis. The types of bikinis that show every thing in playboy models and prostitutes. I mean there has to be some culpability and guilt coming from parents. Because i don’t think young girls have the money and necessary skills to go to a store and buy these types of swmimsuit by themselves. Are the parents in USA going crazy or something? There has to be some sort of conspiracy to stimulate this immoral form of dressing in people in USA.

    Another type of provoking clothes used in America are the so called “Short shorts” that american women use in the summer time as regular clothes to provoke males.

    No wonder that the Muslim culture is attacked so much by the US oligarchies. Because the muslim culture preaches more moralism than the western bourgeoise consumerist culture. And moralism is anti-profits.

    So I think that the main goal of all these types of behavior motivated by the global elite is really profits $$$. That’s all they care about, and they will do any thing, rape, kill, sex, and stimulate rape, death, and immoralism in the masses in order to make more dollars. And i think that the profit-driven system is the main ROOT of all world problems. Because if you think about it, capitalists can make more money with: wars, sex, death, bombs, increased libido (hypersexuality in the exploited masses), divorces, individualism, and fattening foods. Than with a rational, moral, loving, altruist, compassionate, peaceful world.

    Here is a link-article which talks about Pedophocracy:

    http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Pedophocracy/child_sexual_abuse_in_US.htm

    .

  32. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 7:56am #

    Don Hawkins: haha what a great metaphorical way of describing the USA society (Not other countries, but USA, because other countries are waking up, not USA. USA is still sedated by cakes, pizzas and the high carbohydrate american diet)

    BUT IF AMERICANS KNEW THAT US gov. gives about 600 million dollars a year to Colombia, 3 billion dollars a year to Israel, and more billions to support ultra-right wing governments in this world like Saudi Arabia, which could be used specifically on American people, we need a people president.

    You know according to statistics there are about 280 million internet users in the USA, but i don’t think that most internet users get their news from the internet. I suspect that most people in the USA are still too traditional and get their news from TV.

    People in this country cannot realize that a government is there to serve the people, not to wage wars, to fund wars in other countries and to kill people like US Imperialism does around this world. The 600 million dollars given to Colombia are not for food and medicine, but to kill. I don’t know why most American people are so apathetic to international politics, which impacts the US economy.

    According to writter Chalmers Johnson one of the biggest causes of US economic collapse is the excess of money spent on imperialist wars and in its 800 military bases around the world.

    But i am an absolute 100% Marxist-Leninist, i understand that there is no hope of change within the US bourgeoise-state. In order to see a change the proletariat in USA should smash the bourgeoise-state. Obama is only a reformist. And a reformist cannot change the way a state behaves. Only a complete destruction of the US bourgeoise state can democratize and humanize the US government.

    .

  33. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 8:03am #

    Don Hawkins: Hi, again, oh by the way i forgot to say that the world has been the same for hundreds of years. I am reading a novel by the Gouncourt Brothers, and they critisized the way the bourgeoise classes of their times in France loved to live in a fake-world. They said they hated the way the press disguised reality. And the reality in all political systems that we’ve had for hundreds of years has been a reality of a dictatorship of the elites against the majority. Most people since the ancient greeks and romans, have lived in suffering and misery, while only a few have had happie lives.

    .

  34. B99 said on August 22nd, 2009 at 8:32am #

    USF – Didn’t you post that bit on naked female flesh once before, or did they inflict this upon you again?

  35. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 8:56am #

    Oh I forgot do the people on the ship Earth know it is headed into the abyss? Well the people in the wheel house sure do as they are looking right at it. So why not turn the ship? Special interests who are partying on the upper deck could be one reason. How about the people on the middle or lower deck do they know. The people on the middle deck the thinkers are the people who know the best and are trying to get the word to the lower deck as best they can because of the noise of the engines and that same song coming from the upper deck God bless America over and over again and then of course after each song they tell the people on the middle and lower deck we love you very much thank you so much for everything we really do love you. Remember Copenhagen and the climate bill in the Senate is just more talk and something called bullshit. Calm at peace and think of this as kind of a war.

  36. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 9:32am #

    Did anybody see that commercial on TV from re power America I guess Al Gore and his group. It tell’s us that we must re power America and at the end of it the man says we sure hope our Senator’s are listening? What do you think are they listening or for that matter the people on the upper deck are they listening? Well yes I am sure they are and are right now trying to figure out how to put out something called illusion of knowledge and pit one side against the other. Maybe go to alert level orange could be a good trick. You just wait and talk about a house divided, hello, as they sing God bless America. I shouldn’t write this as these people are just so clever and if they figure out we understand will try something else. Face the problem use reason, imagination, work together, knowledge? Apparently much to hard for that upper deck thinking.

  37. Shabnam said on August 22nd, 2009 at 10:13am #

    Does anyone know what DON is doing here? Do you follow what he is saying in relation to this article? I have noticed 99% of the time he writes wired things to divert attention from the subject. Indeed, it is a destructive behaviour and well suited for ……… agencies.

  38. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 10:29am #

    Shabnam you caught me yes you did. Right now I am sitting in a room with not one but twenty super computers and in contact with my people. The agencies I work for are light years away from Earth and my work is almost done. And what is are work well did you ever see the twilight zone episode Elm Street. We are just waiting for you human’s to destroy yourselves then we simply take over. I know you don’t believe me but all part of the plan. What if I said I have a very small bait and tackle shop and sometimes e-mail scientists and sometimes they e-mail me back. Oh boy now you really caught me.

  39. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 22nd, 2009 at 10:33am #

    don
    Did you lately look at your toes and fingers? And concluded that until very recently [in infinity of time] that we lived in or on trees!
    And you thought we ate ants, worms, small snakes, leaves; nuts and fruits when we dared alight from trees?

    imagine now having sex in or on a tree? One had to have much longer and stronger toes to be that much acrobatic.
    having eaten so poorly, but much better that USans do now, we cldn’t develop our brains properly.
    So, we’re not humnas yet!
    And, so, to this day we are not civilized. And the ‘food’ that corporations feed us, makes us even dumber than we were a mn yrs ago.

    But, again, in infinity of time, we just might in mns of yrs become civilized.
    What about floods and rising sees, tho? Will we have to hit the trees once more?
    So, let us be patient and hope for best! tnx

  40. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 10:50am #

    Thank’s Bozh I needed that and feel almost human now. Maybe go climb a tree now no better not mabe just a walk to the barber shop and bring up this subject. It’s ok we talk about many things in the old barber shop.

  41. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:06am #

    B99: This is a socialist website. You should go to http://www.johnmccain.com or http://www.rense.com if you love capitalism so much. Ultra-right wing libertarian conspiracy theorists and Republicans love the free markets.

    .

  42. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:06am #

    B99: This is a socialist website. You should go to johnmccain.com or rense.com if you love capitalism so much. Ultra-right wing libertarian conspiracy theorists and Republicans love the free markets

  43. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:13am #

    Don Hawkins: The truth is that i get bored a lot in USA. This is such a boring country, such a society lacking in any motivation. I don’t know if this is just me, but when i go out in the American boring apathetic streets and public places like Wal Mart, the shopping malls, etc. i get a sense of boredom, apathy and negative energies. The problem of this country is boredom (sensory deprivation).

    Maybe we should hire Feng Shui and Budhist masters to rule the USA, so that we won’t be so apathetic and bored.

    And boredom is anti-revolutionary

  44. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:26am #

    Capitalism has only led Latin America to poverty, misery and hell, like it is doing it to USA.

    But the differences between Latin Americans and USAmericans is that Latin Americans are awake. While the only thing that the USAmericans, the Wal-Mart ANTI-POLITICS, POLITICAL-APATHETIC conformist zombiefied boring drones worry about is binge-eating on Duncan Hines, Pillsbury rolls, frozen pizzas, Pillsbury crossaints (They are good shit), Tostitos with melted cheese, etc. fig-bars, doritos, corn-dogs, pancakes, pillsbury cakes, kraft cheese, Nabisco Ritz cookies, combos, oreos, pop-tarts, combos, tostitos, fajitas, calzonis, Cicis pizzas, Sonic Drive in, Golden Corral, I-hop all u can eat buffets, potatoe salads, twinkies, little debbies, donkin donuts, struddles, apple jax, pecan pies, ice cream, M and ms, Twix, Snickers bars, chocolate chip cookies

    RICOTTA and Butter are another tools used by capitalist-controllers to sedate americans into an endless sleep of cheese, bread, butter and cake slavery.

    Let’s face it capitalism sucks and capitalist parties suck. Here in USA life is a hell for the majority of people. The capitalist American parties (Democrats and Republicans) have only produced: poverty, misery, diabetes, obesity, an epidemia of heart-related deaths and illnesses, foreclosures, tent cities, 20% of unemployment, 80 millions of americans in poverty, and 1 out of 6 american children starving. While a minority which is about 2% to 5% of the USA population is getting richer, and richer and richer. While the rest of americans is getting poorer, poorer and poorer.

    .

  45. Annie Ladysmith said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:35am #

    Dear United-Communist-Front, whoever you are, or think you are, i did not realize that you owned this site, and now that i do, i will desist from writing further blog-bits. If you are bored by Americans you should go live somewhere else like Cambodia or Copenhagen or Tinbuktu. America REALLY dosn’t need shits like you who complain about everything but in reality are PART OF THE PROBLEM. Eat shit and die you little commie freak!

  46. sal said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:39am #

    Michael, in addition to James’ writing regarding Zios’ directing the invasion of Iraq, even the BBC (which is controlled by the lobby group Friends of Israel) reported prior to 2003 that the north of Iraq was totally infiltrated by the israeli army (this was witnessed on a Newsnight report) who were running exercises there readying for what’s to come. In addition the report demonstrated the heirarchy of control of resouces in that area with israelis in charge, Turks as their lackeys and the Kurds the slaves. So, your raving that Zios have nothing to do with the invasion and destruction of Iraq needs to be rethought

  47. sal said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:41am #

    In addition, there are reports from Iraqi ministries that Israeli agents have murdered many hundreds of Iraqi academics.

  48. sal said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:48am #

    Annie, have you read the article on this thread? No you haven’t and your comment has nothing to do with anything, so kindly p**s off.

    Your comment: “If you are bored by Americans you should go live somewhere else like Cambodia or Copenhagen or Tinbuktu”
    Well, if the Americans can get the f**k off out of all the countries they have set up base in then maybe we won’t all be so sick of them!

  49. sal said on August 22nd, 2009 at 11:50am #

    sorry, typo! should be: if the Americans f**k off out of all the countries they have set up base in then maybe we won’t all be so sick of them!

  50. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:00pm #

    well, what can one say? Americans, led by priests by nose, ‘educators’ by one ear, and pols by the other, even gave up cooking, thinking, and talking.

    And since viagra was made; on orders by cia, fbi, clinton [not hillary; she has no use for sex; she didn't even notice she was starved] americans have just about everything.
    Nobody is going to take that away from them! tnx

  51. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:00pm #

    sal: Annie is a capitalist, i dont know what is she doing in this site. This site is socialist, because capitalism is the destroyer of USA, the main enemy of USA.

  52. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:04pm #

    Annie Ladysmith: You stupid capitalist, redneck, Republican Party voter. You need book-reading, to learn that the real reason that USA is collapsing is capitalism. You are the one who should move out of USA, to Israel and some capitalist paradise. And leave us alone here in USA so that we can change USA from capitalism to socialism, which is the only salvation for America.

    So read on the truth of capitalism before you comment any thing here, because your ignorance is the reason of why USA is collapsing, the excess of dumbness and ignorance in the general american voters, is the reason of why many american voters still vote for capitalist political parties.

    Go to marxists.org and to socialistworker.org for an introduction to socialism.

    And stop being capitalist.

  53. Michael Dawson said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:06pm #

    Petras’ crazed substitution of ZPC conspiracy theory for class analysis is one thing. Go with that, if it suits your mind. It’s at least debatable.

    What’s not debatable is Petras’ anti-leftist endorsement of Saddam Hussein as somehow a bearer of civilization. That literally is insane, no debate possible.

    Petras is nuts.

  54. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:09pm #

    Beware of Annie Ladysmith, she is one of the ultra-right wing libertarian conspiracy theory, Tea Party terrorist lunatics fans of Alex Jones, and Rense websites. These people are white-nationalists, and they hate socialism, and democracy.

  55. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:11pm #

    BEWARE OF CAPITALISTS OF THE ULTRA-RIGHT WING TEA PARTY. THEY ARE DANGEROUS PEOPLE. ANTI FOOD STAMPS, AND ANTI-TAXES. TAXES ARE NECESSARY, EVEN HUGO CHAVEZ INCREASED TAXES TO FACE CRISIS. RON PAUL AND LIBERTARIANS ARE ULTRA-RIGHT WINGERS.

    Don’t believe in the ultra-right wing, libertarian conspiracy theorists. The Tea Party, libertarian, ultra-right wing movement is funded by Republican Party corporations like Wal Mart to destroy the American Socialist Parties. And socialism, welfare-state is the only solution to reduce poverty levels in USA.

    http://martinkelly.blogspot.com/2008/03/why-libertarianism-is-wrong-and-will.html

    http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/libertarian.html

    .

  56. Don Hawkins said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:20pm #

    The coming years boring it will not be. Hell just the next 8 months will tell us if we are going to try. To try is the human race’s survival that’s all. An amazing time in between the bullshit. Good morning America I think not more like welcome to the Universe. Maybe we should start off slow welcome to the milky Way Galaxy the solar system the Earth. I know am part of the problem.

  57. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:47pm #

    Michael Dawson: Because James Petras is not a dogmatic marxist of the XX Century Stalinist school of thought. He is a 21st Century Socialist of the Hugo Chavez school of thought. Which is a revised democratic electoral marxism. Another thing is that i don’t understand why so many smart americans like Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan embrace capitalism and free markets. When many nations in this world, specially in Latin America are heading toward statism and market-socialism as the only salvation for the capitalist hell. I mean nobody is pointing a gun against Ron Paul to force him to be capitalist. So why is Ron Paul a capitalist if capitalism is collapsing and cannot allocate resources efficiently anymore?

  58. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 12:52pm #

    Hey you all Annie Ladysmith is a Republican Party Supporter. She comments on ultra-right wing Republican Party websites that deffend torture, fascism and racism: Here is one of those sites:

    http://spectator.org/about

  59. Shabnam said on August 22nd, 2009 at 1:13pm #

    Sal:

    Well said to both closet Zionists and American fools who do not or don’t care about the criminal activities of their government around the world killing everyday innocent people using Al Qaeda as a pretext where does not exist, in fact Al Qaeda is the UNITED STATES. Ben Laden was CIA agent and is dead since 2002, and Taliban where was supported and used in Afghanistan with the help of Pakistan intelligent services and money from Saudi Arabia before the invasion to destabilize Iran from its northern border. These fools do not know that Colombia is a puppet country where their citizen does not control their politician and their land. These fools do not know that majority of killings in Iraq including the one happened a few days ago and killed 80 people widely believed is American directed assassination with the help of Saudi Arabia. You are absolutely right. North of Iraq is a spy network of Israel and we have seen the closet Zionist at Zmag does not reveal the role of Kurds as Israelis’ pawn in the region and actually many time we have seen the closet Zionists at Zmag have presented Kurds as ‘victims’ like the ‘chosen people’ and are totally silent on their terrorist activities where is trained by fucking Israel, a terrorist and racist entity, to fool Americans with their stupid theory that ISRAEL IS AN ASSET. With these lies Jewish Lobby is able to continue screwing Americans from all sides to protect the interest of “Jewish state.” Don’t believe them for a second. Edward Herman and David Petersen have already exposed CPD where these Zionists are active as US government front.
    We are grateful for your work professor Petras. Only those who know the history of the region and the role of the closet Zionists in keeping American public uninformed appreciate your research which reveals nothing but the truth. Same people who attack you are active in spreading faulse information about Iran to smoothen the path for military action against Iran to help their fucking “jewish state” where I am confident to tell them that they will all TAKE IT INTO THEIR FUCKING GRAVES ONE BY JONE.

  60. Deadbeat said on August 22nd, 2009 at 2:09pm #

    Why Petras keeps writing the same essay over and over again shows some kind of attempt to convince when all he really does is get posters like deadbeat making the same remarks, and posters like Max Shields, the other side.

    It is clear to me that Max Shields you’d label a liberal in the sense that his rhetoric is designed to appeal to typically a well-meaning but bourgeoisie white/Jewish “leftist”. Someone who is genuinely concern about the state of affairs but in reality really wants to maintain the white supremacist/Zionist privilege that exist in the United States.

    Mr. Shields disregard and misrepresentation of Marxist ideology is a great example of the problems of the Left. It demonstrates selective amnesia and a total disregard of history and why the Left is impotent in their response to the Capitalist crisis. Mr. Shields has advocated discredited ideas — Georgism (land tax) and the class/racist ideology of Malthus.

    However I don’t believe Mr. Shields is an ignorant individual. At best he is a mindless arrogant elitist or at worst deliberately attempting to disrupt honest analysis. The ease at which you can find contradictions in the positions taken up by Mr. Shields clearly demonstrates his inability to think and his need to resort to distortions and misrepresentation clearly shows someone who is tremendously arrogant or someone whose agenda is to disrupt.

    This behavior is not new on the Left. As Shabnam points out this is the tactic typically deployed by “closet” Zionist. It is the tactic that help to demobilize the anti-war movement and it is the tactic that will ensure the ruling class and status-quo remains intact.

    It is unfortunate however but I’ve experience my share Max Shields who pretend to be “activist” or “Leftist” who only in the end RETARD solidarity because they foment distrust via confusion, disruption, ad hominum fallacies, misrepresentation, obfuscation, and lies. People like Max Shields in the end do more to advance the RULING CLASS agenda than they do to confront it — if that is their true agenda.

  61. dan e said on August 22nd, 2009 at 2:37pm #

    Michael Dawson, I envy your ability to read minds, but have to regret the absence of rational argument in your mini-rants.

    You claim that to describe Iraq under Saddam & Co was a secular republic is evidence that Petras is nuts. However the fact is that Iraq then was not a theocratic monarchy like most Arab states, nor was it a theocratic Apartheid state like “israel”. So Petras was not “celebrating Saddam”, as you put it; he was simply noting aspects of historical reality.
    In your eagerness to attack Petras you attempt to divert DV readers from the main point of the essay: that the US invasion/occupation of Iraq has revealed itself as an allsided effort to utterly destroy the country and its people, an aim that serves nobody and nothing but the Zionists and their visions of a Zionist Empire.
    It is this same vision which underlies Obama’s charade of an attempt to conquer unconquerable Afghanistan; the real focus, the real aim, is the dismemberment of Pakistan and the removal of that potential obstacle to the Zionization of the entire Muslim world.

    Max Shields, I’m disappointed to see you reverting to old habits, defending pro-Israel attacks on somebody like Petras.

    U-S-F: I like your attitude, your instincts, but in my humble opinion your best course would be to study the subjects that have attracted you in more depth, to read much more widely. I think you must be fairly young, so you would have time to cover a great deal.
    Looking back, I wish I’d have been able to find an academic setting where I could have apprenticed myself to some Professor, instead of trying to learn everything on my own. I did manage to learn a lot, but not how to do anything much with it. One of the most impressive things about Petras is how he manages to produce a book a year, with everything thoroughly documented, footnotes galore.

    But Petras is only one authority who corroborates the “War for Israel” thesis first adumbrated (to my knowledge) by Jeff Blankfort in his Leftcurve article back in 2003. Those who keep pushing the Chomsky line, “Big Oil Did It”, need to start by refuting Walt & Mearsheimer, plus Kathy & Bill Christison.
    I’ve been reading Petras off and on for over thirty years now. Let me assure you he knows more about Big Oil than most of you “critics”. Same re Imperialism in general.
    Here’s a suggestion for those of you who’ve recently discovered Big Oil: have you ever read Bill Eveland’s “Ropes of Sand”? Sorry, the House of Saud connection is old news; said Wahabist theocrats are now just another bunch of ZPC stooges.

  62. Mulga Mumblebrain said on August 22nd, 2009 at 3:19pm #

    dan e, you are, in my opinion, absolutely correct to finger Zionism as the principal, but not sole, driving force of US politicidal policy in the Middle East. I remember seeing an accounting of opinion pieces in the US media urging on the US aggression against Iraq. Apparently something like 80% were Zionists, for whom the war was all about WMD (a lie, as was known then and had been since the early 1990s)’freedom’ (a sick, sick, sick joke) and, sub rosa, destroying the Arabs states, Iran, and Pakistan, and breaking them up into powerless statelets to be dominated by the Herrenvolk of Eretz Yisrael. You know, the Oded Yinon ‘A Zionist Plan for the Middle East’, Netanyahu et al’s’A Clean Break’ and various other Zionist plans, all rooted, in the end, in clerico-fascist dreams of an Eretz Yisrael ‘from the Nile to the Euphrates’. In fact it was also reported that the Zionists were so fevered in their lobbying to destroy Iraq that they were told to ‘cool it’, lest they blow their cover.
    Then, once Iraq was conquered, the real horror began. The torture at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere, using techniques developed over decades by the Israelis, specifically suited to humiliating and degrading Arabs and Moslems,and handed over by Israeli contractors. The ‘Salvador Option’ of raising death-squads to terrorise the population, boasted about even in obscure rags like ‘Newsweek’, but now consigned by the Western media sewer to Orwell’s memory-hole.The assassinations of academics as outlined by Professor Petras, which were reported by the BRussells Tribunal (but not by the mass media sewer, of course)to be the work of Mossad, at least in the view of the vast majority of Iraqis they polled. Then there was the deliberate looting of the Museums, the burning of the National Library, and the desecration of significant cultural sites across the country, all clear evidence of visceral racial hatred and civilizational contempt, sure signs of Zionist influence.
    At the same time the Israelis attacked the West Bank. The same tactics were used. Cultural centres, Government offices and other symbols of Palestinian identity were targeted. The Education Ministry was destroyed, its computer records of student results, so useful for future intelligence operations, stolen, its computers smashed. The ‘morally pure’ ubermenschen were even so generous as to defaecate in the offices.
    The obliteration of Palestine, the attempts to do the same in South Lebanon, the medieval savagery of the destruction of Iraq, far outdoing even the Mongols, as they observe in Baghdad, the thirty years plus of destroying Afghanistan, all point to one inescapable conclusion. That the forces of complete and total evil, the representatives of Satan, reside in the ruling circles of Washington and Tel Aviv. And that they are growing more murderous, more ruthless, more desperate, as resistance to their evil grows.

  63. B99 said on August 22nd, 2009 at 4:09pm #

    USF – What makes you think capitalism is dying? Capitalists are busy polarizing the world into hundreds of millions of haves and billions of have-nots but there is no reason to think it is passing into history any time soon. Even if catastrophes wrack the entire globe, and capitalist societies are rent asunder by cataclysms of their own making, you’d still have to conclude that socialist or communal economies are less likely to emerge as the dominant social arrangement than some sort of totalitarian capitalism – at least for much of the world. So maybe you should pull back a bit from the tendentious rhetoric. I can’t imagine you find many allies with a bombastic approach.

  64. someIntegrity said on August 22nd, 2009 at 4:33pm #

    I think I am a progressive liberal.

    A quick analysis of Baathist Iraq can list:
    Tyranny
    A Terror capital of the World
    A misguided Arabist/Islamist development
    Or simply a Mafiosi state – corruption/killing/police state

    Ordinary Iraqis managed to survive, study, work, but lacked freedom.

    A well meant liberation remains a must.

    Israel is concerned with Israel, and is far from being an overreaching power.

    50-60% of Israelis are very liberal, creative, and well educated.

    That is why there is close alliance between USA and Israel.

    All creative Americans can appreciate the friendly relationship.

    Some twisted academia bought the fake Palestinian phrasings, and become anti-objective.

    Why should the modern Israel commit suicide? Beacuse Iraq and Iran declared war on Israel?

    Let us remain humane and sane. The Palestinian society needs positive help but not encouragement for armed suicidal resistance.

  65. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:24pm #

    B99: Why don’t you support the Tea Party, Ron Paul or The Republican Party instead of commenting here on this site. This site is Marxist, and socialist. The webmasters of this website embrace socialism, statism, Chavism, and big fat USSR state. We have Adam Smith, Ayn Rand and Luwig Von Mises.

    You should go to an ultra-right wing Libertarian site. We preach socialism in this site, and we hate capitalism and we want capitalism to die.

    Unlike you, who loves capitalist exploitation of people. And by the way you are wrong in saying that capitalism benefits hundreds of millions people in USA. How is that? i think you got your statitics wrong.

    USA has 300 million people, how can capitalism benefit hundreds of millions? WTF?

    Capitalism only benefits about 25% of US population. And 25% out of 300 million people is not hundreds of millions.

    Why don’t you do some book-reading before you comment on this site. Books won’t bite you. I know that USA is an illiterate nation, but that doesn’t mean that all americans are illiterate pathetic subhumans. This is a nation of differences. We have mental retards like Glenn Beck and Sara Palin, but we also have Upton Sinclair, Noam Chomsky and Bob Avakian.

    .

  66. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:25pm #

    B99: USA NEEDS A SOCIALIST-PARTY TO RISE TO POWER AND SMASH THE BOURGEOISE-STATE !!

    WHAT USA NEEDS IS A TEMPORARY DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT !!

    You know who i really hate in USA? I hate the US Middle classes. Because the middle-classes of this country don’t want USA to get economically better because they conspire to support the bankruptcy of the United States by voting every 4 years for Democrats and Republicans.

    What we need is a workers-council state in USA. A government ruled by workers while at the same time on the economic side: the mega corporations of USA like Wal-Mart, Pepsi, Coca Cola, Mcdonalds, General Electric, etc. owned by workers, thru the system of “workers control of production” (Workers management/workers-ownership), or “Workers stock ownership” however you want to label it.

    “The dictatorship of the proletariat is a stubborn struggle, bloody and bloodless, violent and peaceful, military and economic, educational and administrative against the forces and traditions of the old society.” -Lenin

    The dictatorship of the proletariat is the instrument of the proletarian revolution, its organ, its most important mainstay, brought into being for the purpose of, firstly, crushing the resistance of the overthrown exploiters and consolidating the achievements of the proletarian revolution, and secondly, carrying the revolution to the complete victory of socialism

    The dictatorship of the proletariat arises not on the basis of the bourgeois order, but in the process of the breaking up of this order, after the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, in the process of the expropriation of the landlords and capitalists, in the process of the socialisation of the principal instruments and means of production, in the process of violent proletarian revolution

    Under capitalism the exploited masses do not, nor can they ever, really participate in governing the country, if for no other reason than that, even under the most democratic regime, under conditions of capitalism, governments are not set up by the people but by the Rothschilds and Stinneses, the Rockefellers and Morgans.

    Democracy under capitalism is a dictatorship really, it is a democracy of the exploiting minority, based on the restriction of the rights of exploited majority and directed against this majority.

    Only under the proletarian dictatorship are real liberties for the exploited and real participation of the proletarians and peasants in governing the country possible. Under the dictatorship of the proletariat, democracy is proletarian democracy, the democracy of the exploited majority, based on the restriction of the rights of the exploiting minority and directed against this minority.

    The dictatorship of the proletariat cannot arise as the result of the peaceful development of bourgeois society and of bourgeois democracy; it can arise only as the result of the smashing of the bourgeois state machine, the bourgeois army, the bourgeois bureaucratic apparatus, the bourgeois police.

    Therefore, Lenin is very right in saying:

    “The proletarian revolution is impossible without the forcible destruction of the bourgeois state machine and the substitution for it of a new one” (see Vol. XXIII, P. 342)

    What we need is workers-power, soviet power as the state form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat signifies the suppression of the bourgeoisie, the smashing of the bourgeois state machine and the substitution of proletarian democracy for bourgeois democracy

    Let other people you know learn about socialism! Spread the word… the more people who know the truth, the greater the force against the capitalist system! Resistance forever!

    …………………../´¯/)
    ………………..,/¯../
    ………………./…./
    …………./´¯/’…’/´¯¯`·¸
    ………./’/…/…./……./¨¯\
    ……..(‘(…´…´…. ¯~/’…’)
    ………\……………..’…../
    ……….”…\………. _.·´
    …………\…………..

    SO PLEASE, STICK UP YOUR MIDDLE FINGER TO US IMPERIALISM AND CAPITALIST OPPRESSION!

    .

  67. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:31pm #

    dan e: I know what you mean !! I really do. What you mean is that well-read people, awake people, erudites, enligthened people are diamonds in a garbage can. Like Jim Morrison for example, of The Doors. There hasn’t been a revolution and an awakening in USA since Jim Morrison and The Doors tried to wake up the masses and to help them break on through and wake up from their slumber. But he failed because he was a diamond in a garbage, like USA is, a garbage of consumersim and inanity. Like Brave New World.

  68. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:36pm #

    dan e: Oh i forgot to say, that one doesn’t even need to read any book. To see that USA is controlled by Israhell. I mean USA is the only country in this damn world where a foreign external country (Israel) dictates its politics and interferes in its political campaigns. I mean just look how candidates from both parties have to give speeches to AIPAC prior to being elected. I mean you don’t see Mexican, Colombian, Italian, Chinese, Greek, Russians, Germans, or any other countrie’s politicians giving speeches to jewish lobbies prior to being elected.

    USA is the only nation in this world, that kneels down before another power. Not even Haiti.

    To me USA is not even an empire, but a puppet.

    .

  69. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 5:38pm #

    dan e: And yes, USA needs a second idendependence and self-determination revolution. An independence from corporations, and an independence from Israel. Only a nationalist, socialist revolution can do that. I don’t see any other ideology that liberate USA as socialism can. Capitalism sucks, libertarianism IS FASCISM and RACISM, and it sucks, fascism sucks, social-democracy sucks, monarchy sucks, and feudalism sucks !!

    .

  70. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 6:03pm #

    The Theory Of The Collapse Of Capitalism

    HISTORICAL MATERIALISM

    The question which in the end merits attention is how can an economist who believes he is correctly reconstructing Marx’s views, and who further states with naive self-assurance that he is the first to give a correct interpretation of them, be so completely mistaken and find himself in complete contradiction with Marx. The reason lies in the lack of a historical materialist understanding. For you will not understand Marxian economics at all unless you have made the historical materialist way of thinking your own.

    For Marx the development of human society, and so also the economic development of capitalism, is determined by a firm necessity like a law of nature. But this development is at the same time the work of men who play their role in it and where each person determines his own acts with consciousness and purpose – though not with a consciousness of the social whole. To the bourgeois way of seeing things, there is a contradiction here; either what happens depends on human free choice or, if it is governed by fixed laws, then these act as an external, mechanical constraint on men. For Marx all social necessity is accomplished by men; this means that a man’s thinking, wanting and acting although appearing as a free choice in his consciousness – are completely determined by the action of the environment; it is only through the totality of these human acts, determined mainly by social forces, that conformity to laws is achieved in social development.

    The social forces which determine development are thus not only purely economic acts, but also the general-political acts determined by them, which provide production with the necessary norms of right. Conformity to law does not reside solely in the action of competition which fixes prices and profits and concentrates capital, but also in the establishment of free competition, of free production by bourgeois revolutions; not only in the movement of wages, in the expansion and contraction of production in prosperity ant crisis, in the closing of factories and the laying off of workers, but also in the revolt, the struggle of the workers, the conquest by them of power over society and production in order to establish new norms of right. Economics, as the totality of men working and striving to satisfy their subsistence needs, and politics (in its widest sense), as the action and struggle of these men as classes to satisfy these needs, form a single unified domain of law-governed development. The accumulation of capital, crises, pauperisation, the proletarian revolution, the seizure of power by the working class form together, acting like a natural law, an indivisible unity, the collapse of capitalism.

    The bourgeois way of thinking, which does not understand that this is a unity, has always played a great role not only outside but also within the workers’ movement. In the old radical Social Democracy the fatalist view was current, understandable in view of the historical circumstances, that the revolution would one day come as a natural necessity and that in the meantime the workers should not try anything dangerous. Reformism questioned the need for a `violent’ revolution and believed that the intelligence of statesmen and leaders would tame capitalism by reform and organisation. Others believed that the proletariat had to be educated to revolutionary virtue by moral preaching. The consciousness was always lacking that this virtue only found its natural necessity through economic forces, and that the revolution only found its natural necessity through economic forces, and that the revolution only found its natural necessity through the mental forces of men. Other views have now appeared. On the one hand capitalism has proved itself strong and unassailable against all reformism, all the skills of leaders, all attempts at revolution; all these have appeared ridiculous in the face of its immense strength. But, on the other hand, terrible crises at the same time reveal its internal weakness. Whoever now takes up Marx and studies him is deeply impressed by the irresistible, law-governed nature of the collapse and welcomes these ideas with enthusiasm.

    But if his basic way of thinking is bourgeois he cannot conceive this necessity other than as an external force acting on men. Capitalism is for him a mechanical system in which men participate as economic persons, capitalists, buyers, sellers, wage-workers, etc., but otherwise must submit in a purely passive way to what this mechanism imposes on them in view of its internal structure.

    This mechanistic conception can also be recognised in Grossmann’s statements on wages when he violently attacks Rosa Luxemburg –

    Everywhere one comes across an incredible, barbarous mutilation of the Marxian theory of wages (p. 585).
    – precisely where she quite correctly treats the value of labour-power as a quantity that can be expanded on the basis of the standard of living attained. For Grossmann the value of labour-power is “not an elastic, but a fixed quantity” (p. 586). Acts of human choice such as the workers’ struggles can have no influence on it; the only way in which wages can rise is through a higher intensity of labour obliging the replacement of the greater quantity of labour-power expended.

    Here it is the same mechanistic view: the mechanism determines economic quantities while struggling and acting men stand outside this relation. Grossmann appeals again to Marx for this, where the latter writes of the value of labour-power:

    Nevertheless, in a given country, at a given period, the average quantity of the means of subsistence necessary for the labourer is practically known (Capital. Vol. I, p. 171);
    but Grossmann has unfortunately once again overlooked that in Marx this passage is immediately preceded by:

    In contradiction therefore to the case of other commodities, there enters into the determination of the value of labour-power a historical and moral element.
    Starting from his bourgeois way of thinking Grossmann states in his criticism of various Social Democratic views:

    We see: the collapse of capitalism is either denied or based, in a voluntarist way, on extra-economic, political factors. The economic proof of the necessity of the collapse of capitalism has never been produced (pp. 58-59).
    And he cites with approval an opinion of Tugan-Baranovsky that, in order to prove the necessity for the transformation of capitalism into its opposite, a rigid proof of the impossibility for capitalism to continue existing must first be produced. Tugan himself denies this impossibility and wishes to give socialism an ethical basis. But that Grossmann chooses to call as witness this Russian liberal economist who, as is known, was always completely alien to Marxism, shows to what degree their basic way of thinking is related, despite their opposed practical points of view (see also Grossmann, p. 108). The Marxian view that the collapse of capitalism will be the act of the working class and thus a political act (in the widest sense of this word: general social, which is inseparable from the take-over of economic power) Grossmann can only understand as `voluntarist’, i.e., that it is something that is, governed by men’s choice, by free will.

    The collapse of capitalism in Marx does depend on the act of will of the working class; but this will is not a free choice, but is itself determined by economic development. The contradictions of the capitalist economy, which repeatedly emerge in unemployment, crises, wars, class struggles, repeatedly determine the will to revolution of the proletariat. Socialism comes not because capitalism collapses economically and men, workers and others, are forced by necessity to create a new organisation, but because capitalism, as it lives and grows, becomes more and more unbearable for the workers and repeatedly pushes them to struggle until the will and strength to overthrow the domination of capitalism and establish a new organisation grows in them, and then capitalism collapses. The working class is not pushed to act because the unbearableness of capitalism is demonstrated to them from the outside, but because they feel it generated within them. Marx’s theory, as economics, shows how the above phenomena irresistibly reappear with greater and greater force and, as historical materialism, how they necessarily give rise to the revolutionary will and the revolutionary act

  71. B99 said on August 22nd, 2009 at 6:15pm #

    USF – I did say ‘the world’ – I did not say, ‘the US’ – so it seems you either have trouble reading or you think that the US IS the world. Thus my statements stands.

    What did you mean in saying ‘we have Ayn Rand’? Are you inadvertently expressing your admiration for the right?

    I do like the Doors very much – but they were hardly revolutionary.

    The US is NOT ‘the only country in this damn world where a foreign external country (Israel) dictates its politics and interferes in its political campaigns.” That’s what the US does to one degree or another in as much of the world as it cares to.

    USF – I think by this time next year you’ll either be a devout libertarian or a Moonie or something. You have a tendency to devotee-ism. Socialism takes patience. Some of us have been angling in that direction since the 1960s. We’ve long ago realized that few allies are made with bombast.

  72. lichen said on August 22nd, 2009 at 6:45pm #

    USF, your propaganda really is as dumb as a pile of bricks, and extremely obnoxious. There is no “middle class” in the US – and the people who might make over 80,000$ a year in income are for the most part still living paycheck to paycheck–they have massive student loan debt, credit cards, sky-high housing costs, expensive healthcare, and childcare. That is the reality of people in that income bracket today, and plenty of them do want more social investment; as do people in every category/”class.”

    Unlike dan e, I know you aren’t young to any extent, but you really act so immature. Social democracy has created the highest quality of life in the world, so I don’t think it really “sucks” that much; I’d love to have the benefits that, for instance, Sweden does; that in itself without a socialist revolution(and don’t say nationalist and socialist together if you aren’t aiming for national socialsim,) would have been certainly made my life so much better. It is none of your business what young people choose to wear, further; but older people in the 1950’s said the same thing about teenagers.

    I think most of us could agree on a broad agenda, but I wonder if it is really productive for people to be so caustic to each other about the minor points–about intellectual discussions on language and theory that have no real effect on anything? And no, you are not really in favor of solidarity if all you post is divisive rhetoric that you know offends the people you are talking to, and which has really no basis in reality.

  73. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 7:08pm #

    lichen: Sorry Social-democracy is oligarchic-rule. Only socialism can save USA.

  74. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 7:09pm #

    lichen: Social-Democracy is bullshit. Tony Blair is a social-democrat and look at the mess he left U.K. Why don’t you people begin to read. Reading won’t bite you. You people are like most americans who are real dumb, real uninformed and at the same time think that are smart and well informed. That’s the problem with most people in USA.

    .

  75. United-Socialist-Front said on August 22nd, 2009 at 7:55pm #

    FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE BLIND SHEEPS GETTING RAPED BY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA HERE IS MORE INFO ABOUT THE TRUTH OF CAPITALISM.

    CAPITALISM WAS REALLY AN IDEOLOGY INVENTED BY ADAM SMITH, DAVID RICARDO AND OTHER ECONOMISTS WITH THE GOAL OF INCREASING THE WEALTH OF A FEW OLIGARCHS AND FACTORY OWNERS USING WORKERS AS SLAVES.

    That’s why most americans are poor, in pain, suffering and enslaved, because USA has a capitalist system of pleasures for a few, and pain for the majority.

    So dont trust anti-marxist writters who claim that Marx, Lenin and Chavez are “dictators”. Remember that capitalists “freedom” means zero-government regulation so that business owners could make lots of money in a zero-government regulated system.

    The invention of Capitalism

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0822324911/critiquesofliber

    Review
    “This study is to be admired for its comprehensiveness, scope, and the amount of unearthing and excavation Perelman provides The indictment of political economists who addressed themselves to the matter of primitive accumulation is masterful.”–H. T. Wilson, York University

    Product Description
    The originators of classical political economy—Adam Smith, David Ricardo, James Steuart, and others—created a discourse that explained the logic, the origin, and, in many respects, the essential rightness of capitalism. But, in the great texts of that discourse, these writers downplayed a crucial requirement for capitalism’s creation: For it to succeed, peasants would have to abandon their self-sufficient lifestyle and go to work for wages in a factory. Why would they willingly do this?

    Clearly, they did not go willingly. As Michael Perelman shows, they were forced into the factories with the active support of the same economists who were making theoretical claims for capitalism as a self-correcting mechanism that thrived without needing government intervention. Directly contradicting the laissez-faire principles they claimed to espouse, these men advocated government policies that deprived the peasantry of the means for self-provision in order to coerce these small farmers into wage labor. To show how Adam Smith and the other classical economists appear to have deliberately obscured the nature of the control of labor and how policies attacking the economic independence of the rural peasantry were essentially conceived to foster primitive accumulation, Perelman examines diaries, letters, and the more practical writings of the classical economists. He argues that these private and practical writings reveal the real intentions and goals of classical political economy—to separate a rural peasantry from their access to land.

    This rereading of the history of classical political economy sheds important light on the rise of capitalism to its present state of world dominance. Historians of political economy and Marxist thought will find that this book broadens their understanding of how capitalism took hold in the industrial age.

    Book-review.
    By Dr. Regino Diaz-Robainas (Stuart, FL USA) – See all my reviews

    An impressive study of the significance of Primitive Accumulation in the development of the refined and reified slavery that we call Capitalism. Through Primitive Accumulation, in its pure, somewhat abstract “original sin” form, the ancestors of those who today control the wealth and power in the world robbed- by violence and brute coercion- the means of autonomous livelihood from the majority of peoples.

    It was the brutal process of “separating people from the means of providing for themselves” to turn them into instruments of production for profits, as in factories. This process evolved into more habitual and masked “market relations” to institutionalize and render more permanent the status of workers as wage quasi-slaves. In contrast to Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham and other apologists and defenders of the system.

    Marx described this process with historical concreteness describing such historical events as the English Enclosure and Game laws. The conventional view has been that primitive accumulation was substituted by subtle and less exploitative reified market relations. But, as Perelman explains with resolute clarity,the two aspects of Capitalism are dialectically and continuously interlocked.

    After all, between Bentham’s struggle to subdue the poor into military work prisons with lives rigidly controlled in the service of the Masters’ profits- shades of Auschwitz- and Greenspan’s concerns (!) about the “wealth effect” reducing the willingness of workers with some minimal invested savings to get back to the “labor force” for “flexible” wages and the new regulator of “markets” concern for “unacceptably low levels of unemployment”- is there, really, that much difference ? The brutal process continues with such slogans as “buy when there’s blood in the streets”, and Michael Perelman has done a great service in describing it.

  76. lichen said on August 22nd, 2009 at 9:09pm #

    No, obviously tony blair has nothing to do with the Scandinavian social democracy states. If your kind of dogmatic, outdated, scapegoating, brainless marxism/trotskyism is the only way to save the US, than we can all kiss it goodbye, because it is never going to happen. But since you are SPAM, since you are a troll, since you are anti-humanist and anti-equality, I’m not going to bother anymore.

  77. mary said on August 23rd, 2009 at 12:04am #

    Returning to the subject of Professor Petras’s really excellent article, the BBC are reporting that the US is giving the names of those being held as ‘terror suspects’ in Iraq and Afghanistan. Another stone is turned and more of the slime and horror is revealed.

    US ‘names secret terror suspects

    The US military has begun notifying the Red Cross of the identities of terror suspects being held at secret camps in Iraq and Afghanistan, US reports say.

    The International Committee of the Red Cross would not comment on the report, which the New York Times carried quoting unnamed US officials.

    The policy reportedly took effect this month with no public announcement.

    Correspondents say that, if confirmed, the move represents a victory for human rights groups.

    Citing three senior military officials, the New York Times said the policy would give the Red Cross access to dozens of suspected foreign fighters captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    They are being held at so-called “temporary screening camps” run by US special forces at secret locations in Balad in Iraq, and Bagram in Afghanistan.

    The Pentagon has previously said that providing information about these detainees could jeopardize counter-terrorism efforts.

    It has refused to comment on the latest reports.

    This week, the detention policies of the former Bush administration are likely to come under further scrutiny with the publication of a CIA report dating from 2004 into its interrogation practices at that time.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8216576.stm

    There is further information on Balad air base here
    (www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/balad-ab.htm)

  78. Deadbeat said on August 23rd, 2009 at 3:16am #

    United-Socialist-Front thanks for posting some clarity regarding the truth of the intention of these classical economist. There is a fallacious argument today that this monopoly capitalism is not the capitalism of Adam Smith and that “ideology” is not the issue.

    It appears that Adam Smith was just another ruling class apologist and that his writing was merely used to provide a “rationalization” and a “justification” for imposing capitalist wage slavery upon people. Thus there is only one form of Capitalism and that is exploitation of the masses to extract surpluses to be placed in the control of Capitalist.

    There is only one solution to Capitalism — its demise.

  79. Max Shields said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:08am #

    Rosemary’s point (so succinctly and aptly stated) dan e is that this war did not begin with George W. Bush.

    You can look through this, and just about everything else in the world, as a Zionist conspiracy. There have been dissident voices here who differ with you and Deadbeat on this. None of these posters (with the exception of those zionist who occasion the site) ever quibble about the role Zionists and particularly Israeli Zionists have created atrocities in the region.

    Let’s separate this out. This Chomsky-styled Zionism is a red herring you and Deadbeat use to deflect criticism of Petras and your positions. I for one am NOT a Chomsky-styled Zionist (and don’t expect to be any time soon).

    If you deal with the facts, strip out the hyperbole, you end up with Rosemary’s simple question.

    But even before 1991, the situation with oil in the ME has been one of major US national interest concern. If all you want to talk about is whether or not Big Oil was behind the invasion and occupation of Iraq, than you’ve stripped the reality of all its context concern the role of the only thing that has any importance to the West and to the US empire. The US empire doesn’t care squawt about Palestinians, Iranians, Iraqis, Egyptions, Saudis, Jordanian…shit this was the creation of the West…it is a state of mind consisting almost exclusively of sand and given prominence with the exploration and discovery of oil. In fact there would be no Israel without this oil…certainly not the militaristic state we see today.

    So, let’s get the facts straight. Empires, like the US, don’t invade because it’s a fun thing to do in the fall, but because there is something precious enough to make the trip “worth while”. Zionism isn’t exactly Morning in America, ask your SUV neighbors what is.

  80. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:10am #

    dan e,
    We do not know why US is in afpak, iraq or why it wldn’t thus far allow or push for one state or two state solution in ex-palestine.
    regarding the fact that we do not have as of yet a solution in palestine, i can only guess about why is that so.
    Neither US nor israel is saying what the final goal in palestine is and which country had, thus far, greater or sole say in preventing establishment of an israel or a ‘jewish’ state.

    We also do not know that US wanted to conquer afgh’n. The word “conquest”, being a generalization, appears imposssible to decypher or to say precisely what it means.

    Perhaps state department’s- or whoever is planning the warfare in afgh’n- aim was to keep afgh’n dismembered, occupied, puppetized and to establish permament bases there.

    As cheney had said regarding death of soldiers, They volunteered! More soldiers will be killed for American Dream. By “american”, i mean that only about 10% of people in US are dreaming americans; others appear to be in a nightmare/quagmire.
    And since i believe that there is no longer america, nationalism, americans, or laws/constitution, i cld have said that that 10% of people are also non-americans; they are plutocrats, dreaming about how to maintain or augment their wealth.

    as for getting people to do killings for the 10 or even 20% of rich people, it won’t be any problem. The wars or messes go on in perfect safety for the planners of all that mischief and their children.

    And, yet, we do not even know who are these people who order and plan warfare. It dosen’t seem to be Bush or Obama? Or? tnx

  81. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:48am #

    ATHENS, Greece (Aug. 22) – A massive wildfire tore through outlying suburbs north of Athens early Sunday, destroying homes and forcing thousands to flee in dramatic overnight evacuations, Fire Service and local officials said.

    “The situation is tragic. Fires are out of control on many fronts,” greater Athens local governor Yiannis Sgouros said.
    A state of emergency was declared in greater Athens, in the worst destruction seen here since massive fires struck southern Greece in 2007 and killed more than 70 people.

    ATHENS (Reuters) – Wildfires torched scores of homes and thousands of acres of forest in the outskirts of Athens on Sunday and sent hundreds of residents fleeing their homes, authorities said.

    Thick plumes of smoke hung over the Acropolis as the flames, fanned by strong winds, raged unchecked for a second day, testing state resources and the conservative government, which is facing a snap election by March.

    Hundreds abandoned their homes overnight as the blaze reached residential communities around Athens. Many were frantically trying to stop the flames from reaching houses with garden hoses and tree branches.

    “We are facing a great ordeal,” Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis said. “The fire department is making a superhuman effort.”

    “The destruction is enormous,” Aghios Stefanos deputy mayor Panagiotis Bitakos told Greek television. “They allowed one fire to destroy all of Attica.”

    The forests are burning people Alaska, California, Europe. Of course many other changes happening and still time maybe. The climate summit in Copenhagen will not go well as the greatest nation on Earth so far feels it’s better for us to call call now or watch good morning America or fox and friends. The cap and trade bill is a joke on the human race and the so called leaders in the rest of the World know it and it probably can’t even pass. To try if we do will be rather easy to see. All we have to do is end the industrial civilization as we know it that’s all and we should notice that. A complete new way of thinking and again things should be made as simple as possible but not simpler kind of a nobrainer. I have to admit watching all of this as we head into the abyss is strange to say the least. Say the climate bill in the States doesn’t happen and Copenhagen just more words then what? Will we be told to watch good morning America or fox and friend’s listen to your leaders shop at Wal Mart put that Christmas gift on lay away. This is nut’s people real nut’s. Of course the bullshit is going to reach new levels in time and space. To me unless we hear that people of Earth speech not just here in the States but from all the so called World leaders we will not try. So far it is just total foolishness on a grand scale and people are still buying it. Oh the problem is not that serious, oh yes it is on a grand scale. Maybe the thinking is as millions die and then billions problem solved well I don’t think that is how this little problem work’s. The best guess is 9 years to level the gases and that will take a Herculean effort that has nothing to do with drinking wine on the upper deck on the dot. Again this will be strange to watch how it play’s out to say the least. I still think reason, imagination, knowledge, working together but probably much to simple for all the complex mind’s who seem to enjoy the third grade or another way of looking at it is stuck on stupid. It look’s like about 6 to 8 months and the what? I don’t think to many people have that answer not really.

  82. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 6:07am #

    usf,
    The word “capitalism” [or any ism] is a generalization. There is nothing wrong in using it as long as one is aware that a generalization can be defined ['explained'] in perpetuum.
    And we can expect to obtain different ‘explanations'; in priciple a different one for every human.

    i do not use the word “capitalism”. I have no use for it. “Capitalism” stands for tns of events.
    So, i suggest, we talk/write about some of the events/happenings.

    One of the happenings, easily observable, is the fact that for millennia we’ve had just about everywhere a gradated master-slave relationship.
    So, let us tell people that. Eh, fella, u are a near-total dependency; u depend on “them”. It’s called also your country.
    You are not as independent even tho “them”, your enemy, are teaching u to be fiercely independent and u believed them and are sure now that your truly free and independent.
    You’re not free; you’re in bondage! Forget about freedom. It’s an illusion that makes u delusional.
    To be is to be related, interdependent, unafraid, peaceful, serene, confident, etc.
    “them” [ur country] destroyed all that. Now, u are a nervous wreck. U are now angry, envious, obese, ashamed, at sea. U don’t like ur ears, thighs, toes, chest, chin, hair, healthy meal, teeth, nose, unions, hobos.
    but when u were a tyke, u weren’t so hateful.
    U were tabula rasa. And if it wasn’t for “them” u wldn’t have become tabula full of baloney.

    Lesson: don’t say i am this and that but say i became a nervous wreck or this or that. So how did i become a nervous wreck? That’s the question and there are answers/elucidation.

    Start by looking at “them”! And, note please, above all else, history is not mystory. History is only mystory when told by the dreaded enemy called “them” or my country! tnx

  83. Synic3 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 6:15am #

    Re: someIntegrity said on August 22nd, 2009 at 4:33pm #

    someIntegrity,

    I doubt you have any integrity at all.
    Most of the list you supplied are lies and fabrication. For example Iraq under Sadam

  84. Synic3 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 6:28am #

    Re: someIntegrity said on August 22nd, 2009 at 4:33pm #

    someIntegrity,

    I doubt you have any integrity at all.
    Most of the list you supplied are lies and fabrications. For example Iraq under Sadam was one of the most secular states in the Middle East with full right and acceptance of Christians and women in high government positions and in all walks of life.
    No religious movements or organizations were allowed under Sadam.
    The crimes of Israel against the Palestinian people are well documented and which are crimes against humanity by any measure you use.
    Pleasee measure up to your name and have some intigerity because you have none.

  85. Synic3 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 6:51am #

    USF,

    Your repeated rhetoric, cliches and sensationalism is a turn- off , dumb and counter productive.
    I lam eft of center who is for seriously controlled and regulated capitalism with a limit on the size of corporations and where the government owns oil, gas, coal, eletricity generation and distribution and own large scale logging .
    The Federal Reserve should be owned by the government and not privately owned .
    Of course we should have universal health care like UK.

  86. Synic3 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 7:00am #

    Max Shields wrote:
    “In fact there would be no Israel without this oil…”

    I agree with you 100% in that.

  87. United-Socialist-Front said on August 23rd, 2009 at 7:30am #

    Deadbeat: You know why a large sector of USA is so confused about what is capitalism, socialism etc? Because since 9-11 there has been a rise in the ultra-right wing, llibertarian conspiracy theory movement in America. I don’t want to make conspiracies about it the rise in the libertarian conspiracy-theory movement. But the truth is that the rise in the libertarian conspiracy theory movement, has weakened and destroyed the strength of the USA left, by inventing bullshit about capitalism, corportarism and by throwing the mental virus in the masses that what we have here in USA is not capitalism, but corporatism.

    .

  88. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 7:41am #

    If we are going to do that we just might want to hurry. Like I said just the next six to eight months then then and H1N1 and people living in tent’s unemployment in some States 14% or higher if the true numbers were show. I see Kadafi is going to put up a tent in New Jersey well he will not be alone. Unemployment Worldwide growing not just here in the States and now could be a good time to say,”People of Earth we are in deep do do”. Face it not with the thinking or system that got us here but kind of a new way of thinking.

  89. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 8:25am #

    Probably a very good idea to save as many life forms as possible. The human’s that live in Gaza or Israel are the life forms, yes. Human’s in the States life forms and the animals Worldwide and plants life forms, yes. Human’s Worldwide life forms, yes. A corporation a life form, no. The space station or central banks, car companies and on and on life forms, no. It appears already to late for millions of life forms and it might be a real good idea to save as many of those life forms as possible not just this one or that one as many as possible. What do you think a new way of thinking? Remember life forms so far with what we know life forms very rare in the known Universe.

  90. B99 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 8:57am #

    USF – What are your proposals concerning getting beyond the race issues that bedevil the US? Is your proposal that we should all band together and overthrow capitalism? How about reproductive rights? Should the anti-abortionists drop their demand that abortion be made illegal, and instead join the revolution to overthrow capitalism? Overthrow capitalism now! This afternoon at the latest!

  91. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 9:08am #

    This morning would have been better and remember on this life form part a good idea to connect a few dot’s.

  92. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 10:07am #

    Al Jazeera

    News Europe

    Emergency declared over Athens fire

    More than 10,000 people have been forced
    to leave their homes [AFP]

    A state of emergency in and around the Greek capital has declared and at least 10,000 people ordered to leave their homes as wildfires continue to sweep through thousands of acres of forest near Athens.
    Scores of homes were destroyed on Sunday as fires fanned by strong winds raged unchecked for a second day.
    Some people were refusing to leave their properties as the flames approached the suburbs of Aghios Stefanos, Anthoussa, Pallini, Pikermi and Dionyssos, Greek officials and eyewitnesses said.
    Many people sprayed water throughout their properties and cleared brush and beat embers with tree branches as they frantically tried to stop the flames from reaching houses.
    “I feel lost, I don’t know what to do … there’s nothing left, everything is burnt,” said Yiannis Tedoros, a resident of Dionyssos village.

    The handling of the fire, the biggest since Greece’s worst wildfires in living memory killed 65 people in a 10-day inferno in 2007, will be crucial for the premier’s political fate as the conservative government gears up for a snap election by March.

    Karamanlis’s government, which is clinging to a one-seat majority in parliament, trails the socialist opposition in opinion polls.

  93. Michael Dawson said on August 23rd, 2009 at 11:10am #

    Dan e, I’m not reading minds. I’m reading published words: Petras described Saddam’s Iraq as a “modern secular republic.”

    Your attempts to avoid thinking about that fact are cute. Iraq wasn’t a theocracy, so therefore Petras is right, according to you.

    That’s a mighty interesting definition of “modern secular republic.” I guess Brunei and Myanmar are also modern secular republics.

    As to what’s been “revealed” about the Iraq invasion, where is your evidence that it was designed to destroy a civilization, rather than project US power farther into the oil fields? Mere statement of your own (or Petras’) opinion is not evidence, BTW. I’m talking about documents, words of the powerful, etc.

    Meanwhile USF: Give it a rest. Your grasp of Marxism, historical materialism, and current events are all about the same — a sad joke. And your sophomoric Stalinist harangues are simply funny. You might consider hitting the books yourself, rather than yelling at people about John Gray’s hackneyed mental diarrhea.

  94. United-Socialist-Front said on August 23rd, 2009 at 11:11am #

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: THE LAND OF PLUTOCRACY, SUFFERING, PAIN AND MISERY

    http://web.archive.org/web/20030114005314/www.efn.org/~valdas/america2.html

    “America is a mistake, a giant mistake!” -Sigmund Freud

    No foreigner who visits the United States fails to be asked by at least one American: “So, how do you like America?” And, as a rule, they always ask in such a tone that only an affirmative answer is considered possible. Personally, I have heard this question at least a hundred times. At first, I tried to be polite. My answers usually were quite diplomatic, such as, “Well, it is interesting here, and different from my country,” or something of that sort. But today perhaps the most diplomatic answer I could give would be: “To put it mildly, I do not like it at all.”

    Much water has flowed under many bridges since that day when I first stepped on this continent. My world outlook has changed a good deal and now I understand a lot of such things that I wasn’t able to comprehend earlier. Today, reflecting on the time when we first arrived here, I realize how naive I was. Or perhaps ignorant. I really believed that the United States of America was a democratic and free country. Moreover, I imagined it to be a highly advanced and progressive nation, maybe even the most civilized country on earth in history. How foolish of me!

    Just before starting to write this I flipped through the pages of an old booklet that I had found in a stack of papers. It was the program for the 1990 U.S. Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. To my shame and chagrin, I must admit now that I was not only a participant, but one of the featured speakers at this conference, side-by-side with Newt Gingrich, Jesse Helms, Phil Gramm and others… what should I call them? It’s hard to pick a name strong enough for such … individuals.

    Being in political exile from the former Soviet Union, I was duped by the U.S. Government and lured into this country. Now, as I understand how it happened, I am embarrassed that I allowed myself to be fooled. Today I blame myself for some of the direct consequences that have followed. Since my wife was pregnant at the time we came here, our daughter was doomed to be born and suffer in this extremely unpleasant social environment. Now, she can’t even attend school here, because of the constant danger of being infested with head lice from her American classmates…

    Without getting too deep into the particulars of my personal story, I just want to make my premise clear before proceeding with what I have learned while living here in America. First, I have to make it understood that I had absolutely no animosity or bias with respect to the United States before coming here. If I did, I wouldn’t have participated along with Gingrich and his ilk in gatherings of right-wing American politicians. If I had any prejudices, they were for — not against — the USA. It may sound bizarre, but there was a time when I had a portrait of U.S. President Ronald Reagan on my writing-desk in Lithuania.

    The truth is I simply wasn’t informed enough to have a fully formed opinion about the United States at that time. In fact, I knew very little about this country and this society. But I was always curious about America and I wanted to find out more. Beyond the grim reality of life in the Soviet Union came glimpses of a shining place, a good place. I wanted to understand this system, and how this society functioned. I really had no idea what true capitalism was like. This is why I came. I simply wanted to learn more about it.

    All the information concerning the United States that we had while living in the Soviet Union came mainly through propaganda sources: Soviet official propaganda — naturally anti-American — on one side, and American propaganda such as Voice of America and Free Europe radio programs from another side. It goes without saying we tended to believe American sources more. After all, the American propaganda always was much more sophisticated than the clumsy Soviet “agitprop.”

    That being so, all my limited “knowledge” about America at that time was derived entirely from those propaganda sources. I had an eclectic mix of both very positive and very negative impressions in my head. Unfortunately, such information wasn’t sufficient enough to form a solid opinion. One couldn’t have a clear picture of American reality based only on such unreliable accounts. Therefore, when I was offered an option to come and live here, I was foolish enough to swallow the bait.

    Well, there are still thousands, perhaps even millions of naive people around the world who still dream about coming and living here. America remains the destination of choice for those who wish to emigrate from their own countries. It is still like a mysterious enchantress to many. Actually, this is the main reason why I’m writing this now. I want to tell the truth to the people who are either ill-informed and know next to nothing about this country, or whose knowledge is distorted by propaganda.

    In Lithuania, my native country, which was occupied by Russia at that time, I actively opposed Soviet communism and fought against it at every opportunity. As a result, I was expelled from the Soviet Union. One cannot say that I came here with a communist mindset.

    I always hated that Soviet version of their mock-socialism and my opinion on the whole remains unchanged. The Soviet system made claims to be “real socialism,” but it wasn’t socialism at all. At least, it wasn’t characterized by the democratic egalitarianism that I define as socialism, and that I would like to see in the world. As a matter of fact, the Soviets distorted and defiled the very concept of socialism.

    Now I have spent almost nine years observing American society. Not only observing, but studying, analyzing, and comparing it to other societies. When I lived in the Soviet Union I thought that the Soviet communist system was the worst possible social order. Evidently, I was wrong. The more I scrutinize the American reality, the deeper I am shocked by all the evil that I see here.

    Ironically, after I contrast actually-existing American extreme capitalism with defunct Soviet Communism, I judge this system as no better than the other. Moreover, after living here, I realize that the American system is perhaps worse. Actually, from my point of view, they are both like two ends of the same stick. It makes no difference with which end to strike. Both cause the same pain…

    There can be no doubt that only a very few people in the former Soviet countries would claim that the communist system was perfect or even good, but perhaps even fewer would say that what they have now is better. Everyone would agree that the Soviet system had very serious flaws, but in some ways — actually many — yes, it was considerably better than what they have here in America. I’m of the opinion that for the vast majority of working people, the Soviet system, though bad enough as it was, would have been definitely more acceptable than this American version of extreme capitalism, if they had a choice.

    Well, we can see now how “happy” the majority of the people in those former Soviet countries are today, after they have tried out the reality of “free markets” on their own backs. Most people that I personally know, my close friends, relatives, and acquaintances who live in post-Soviet countries including my native Lithuania, acknowledge today that even the bad Soviet system wasn’t so terrible when compared to American-style laissez-faire capitalism.

    According to a recent report published in the British medical journal Lancet, the average life expectancy at birth for Russians plunged dramatically since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The study reports that the collapse of the USSR and the subsequent restoration of capitalism has created an unprecedented demographic catastrophe: “The magnitude and steepness of the fluctuations in mortality rates and life expectancy in Russia are without parallel in the modern era.”

    A wild and free market fury has led to a massive drop in the standard of living and to cultural decline in former Soviet countries. Health care and education have sharply deteriorated. Almost all of the social gains won through the hard work and sacrifice of generations of people have been destroyed.

    On the other hand, the power of the old Communist Party nomenklatura (cadre) has not only remained intact, it has grown. Former party and KGB functionaries enriched themselves enormously. They have become the ardent champions of private property. They dream now of not only matching the wealth and luxury of the American capitalists, but to exceed it.

    The Russian economy today is in severe crisis. The level of production continues to sink. Social differentiation has reached a very sharp level in Russia, as well as in all other post-Soviet countries, and brings about quite different moods within the various layers of society. Those few who have accumulated enormous wealth are, of course, happy with the changes. They want to preserve the status quo so they can hang onto what they have plundered.

    At the other pole of society is the overwhelming majority. These people have been thrown into an existence marred by poverty, spiritual devastation and exhaustion. Viewing events through their personal perspective, they regard the present state of affairs as a complete social disintegration tantamount to the end of civilization and culture.

    Now after living here and seeing the capitalist reality by myself for long enough, I have no doubt about it either. All those horrible things in Russia are coming from here, from America. These are the very things that I see here every day. That is why I no longer have illusions about this country, this system, and this society. What I have seen here is fundamental injustice, brutal exploitation, ruthless competition, vulgar materialism, rampant consumerism, morbid individualism, obscene greed, odious hypocrisy, ad nauseum…

    To be honest, when I had to study the works of Karl Marx in school, I wasn’t attracted by his ideas very much. It was required work assigned with little inspiration. But my experiences elevated me to where I can see more clearly. I am beginning to understand that the “old fellow” perhaps was right about more than he was wrong. It took me eight years of living in the citadel of capitalism to comprehend things and to become a staunch supporter of a democratic socialism. The sickening reality of America transformed me from a sort of pro-capitalist libertarian into a socialist to the core. My ideal now is a socialist society built upon justice, rule by the people, and solidarity.

    It would not be an overstatement to say I came here to America with a very open mind. But I had my eyes open wide as well, and it didn’t take long to see reality clearly. If after all that I had learned I could turn back time and be able to return to the year 1989, I wouldn’t make such a stupid decision as to move here, of course. Well, I don’t think that I will stay in the United States for the rest of my life. Could I wish it on my family?

    With this essay I will try to shine a light on what should be all too evident human rights violations that the United States of America refuses to discuss. After years of observation, I have concluded that this system is fundamentally unjust and inhumane. America claims to be “The Land of Liberty and Democracy,” but after living here I realize by now that this is not true. In reality, the United States of America is a land of misery and plutocracy.

    Now, I shall proceed with a detailed explanation of why this is so. I also must emphasize that what I say about the United States is based not only on my personal, subjective experiences but also on objective observation, study, and analysis.

  95. United-Socialist-Front said on August 23rd, 2009 at 11:26am #

    DECONSTRUCTING THE EGO/MIND

    This is the most important guide you’ll ever read. (if you read it all)

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R2W1F3QTCWQMGD/ref=cm_syt_dtpa_f_3_rdssss0/104-0646618-7427952?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=sylt-center&pf_rd_r=0Y1Y54049S7WR44VSDJ5&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_p=253457301&pf_rd_i=0452287588

    Deconstructing the Ego/Mind
    The truth is the answer to every problem that ever has and ever will exist, and if we look at the state of the world today, it’s pretty obvious that we are quite unaware of what the truth actually is. Why is it that we’re so unaware of the truth? Because we don’t want it, we think we already know it, or as Dr. David Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D. says in Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior, that “The design of the human mind renders it intrinsically incapable of being able to tell truth from falsehood.” This is a guide not only to the spiritual truths that solve ALL of our problems (if we let it and allow it to), but also a guide to the highest levels of Enlightenment, for those who are ready. It was said by Eckhart Tolle in The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment that “Furthermore, any teaching that puts the spotlight of attention on the workings of the ego will necessarily provoke egoic reaction, resistance, and attack.”, so this guide won’t be for everyone.

    Truth
    relative
    1. Not absolute or complete
    2. Properly related in size or degree or other measurable characteristics

    absolute
    1. Perfect or complete or pure
    2. Complete and without restriction or qualification
    3. Not limited by law
    4. Expressing finality with no implication of possible change
    5. Without conditions or limitations
    6. Not capable of being violated or infringed

    The words of truth are always paradoxical because there are different levels of truth (relative). What is “truth” at one level is not necessarily “truth” at other levels. Quite often, higher levels of truth render lower ones irrelevant and obsolete. For something to be truth at all, it must be relevant and beneficial to oneself, and all others, without exception. Truth is universal and impersonal. It applies to all and excludes no one. The truth is still the truth even if it’s rejected or not currently understood. Everything you believe, is the truth, but only to you, and only because you believe it’s the truth. The real truth is what it is despite our opinions and beliefs about it. Truth NEVER creates or perpetuates problems. It only solves, dissolves, and removes problems. In order for something to be Absolute Truth, it must be unlimited, whole, complete and perfect beyond description. For this to be possible, it must be INFINITELY EVERYTHING beyond change, words, mental concepts, form, and physicality. In other words, it is No-Thing, yet Infinitely Everything, yet beyond both because both are mere concepts.

    World Peace
    This guide is for those who are willing to start looking inwards at the workings of the ego/mind rather than focusing on external phenomena. One is not subject to negative mentalities and stress when the mind doesn’t react (fight or flight) to outside phenomenon. One is not subject to the faulty workings of the ego/mind at all when one stops identifying the automatic random repetitive thoughts of the mind as being “me”. The very nature of the ego/mind can be summed up in one word… DRAMA. And what is drama? It’s the absence of peace (of mind). What we think and believe in our minds determines our actions, and so, the state of the world, and it’s problems, are a perfect reflection of the thought processes of the people that inhabit it. The world’s problems cannot be solved by trying to fix the outcomes and EFFECTS of our thought processes. It’s the THOUGHT PROCESSES that must be changed. In other words, every individual has to change oneself in order to change the world. Rather than thinking that others need to change themselves to suit your opinions, you must change yourself, and those opinions. World peace cannot be forced upon anyone because force creates more conflict. It will happen when every individual is at peace within their own mind. Conflict in the mind creates conflict in the world. Peace of mind creates peace in the world, and it all starts with you. If you’re not at complete peace in this very moment, and every other moment, it’s because of the thought processes and emotions that are standing in the way, in this very moment, and every other moment. If you want complete peace for yourself, or for the rest of the world, simply let go of those thoughts and emotions, in this very moment, and every other moment. It’s no more complicated than that, even if the ego/mind thinks otherwise.

    The Search for Truth
    The movie The Secret (Extended Edition), and what’s taught in it (the law of attraction), is beginning to take the world by storm, and while this may be extremely beneficial to the masses, for those seeking Enlightenment it’s just more relative truth, another obstacle to be relinquished, surrendered and let go of. There’s creating specific things intentionally with thought, and then there’s having COMPLETE TRUST and FAITH that the universe will, and is, supplying EVERYTHING that one “needs”. However, some people might require the first step in order to eventually reach the second. Sooner or later one comes to realize that neediness and craving are never ending and cannot be filled by depending upon external phenomena. Happiness is experienced from within which means the source of it is within, when it’s chosen. The more it’s chosen, the larger it grows, and the larger it grows, the more we realize it’s within. Happiness is a choice, and freedom comes from having no specific “needs” (addictions, cravings) outside oneself. Choosing to be happy at all times brings inner wholeness, completion, and peace. If one is already utterly whole and complete, NOTHING else is needed.

    In The Highest Level of Enlightenment it’s made clear that negatives are not the opposite of positives, but rather the ABSENCE of positives (think temperature on a thermometer). It’s not possible to be needy and complete/happy at the same time because neediness is the absence of happiness/completion. We can’t focus on negatives and somehow expect the “opposite” to happen. Whatever we put our focus on, we receive. Focusing on the negatives will bring more of the negatives. Focusing on the positives will bring more of the positives. This is where we take a REALLY close look at our current life circumstances, and then we REALLY look at the thoughts, concepts, perceptions, attitudes, limitations, emotions, opinions, and beliefs that go on inside our own head, and we realize there’s a HUGE connection.

    For beginners on the spiritual path, the popular What the Bleep!? – Down the Rabbit Hole (QUANTUM Three-Disc Special Edition) movie is an excellent place to start, as well as Tomorrow’s God: Our Greatest Spiritual Challenge by Neale Donald Walsch, A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose by Eckhart Tolle, and the previously mentioned The Secret movie. For the more scientifically minded people, or for those looking for the hard scientific proof, you might want to start with The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe by investigative journalist Lynne McTaggart.

    Beyond The Secret
    The major underlying points to grasp in The Secret, are that, first, unconditional happiness, gratitude, peace, acceptance and forgiveness must be chosen FIRST, and then the rest of one’s life will reflect that perfectly. In fact, a person’s circumstances and situations are already, and always, an absolutely perfect reflection of the attitudes, emotions, thoughts, beliefs, and choices of that individual. Second, a point which wasn’t really even talked about, is that everything and everybody is interconnected. All is One. The law of attraction would not work if this wasn’t true. Third, that the law of attraction, what goes around comes around, you reap what you sow, everything comes full circle, the ebb and flow, balance in the universe, or karma, is in effect 100% of the time. There can be no “cause” of anything. There are only effects and automatic consequences of what one is (choices, thought processes, feelings, actions). Picture yourself as a tiny magnet among countless others. Likes attract likes. Which means that there is no such thing as a co-incidence, accident, random event, miracle, fluke, luck, or chaos. The entire universe is basically an infinite electromagnetic field where everything is happening exactly as it needs to according to what we make ourselves to be. To put it simply, EVERYTHING is karma, and everything is happening spontaneously on its own as an automatic consequence. What you make yourself to be is a choice. What happens to you as a result of what you are, is not.

    Next, if there’s no “cause” of anything, then reincarnation explains perfectly why “bad” things happen to “good” people, with the science of cellular biology also coming to this realization in The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing The Power Of Consciousness, Matter And Miracles by cellular biologist Dr. Bruce Lipton, Ph.D. This book is solid science but it’s written in a way that’s perfectly accessible to the layman as well.

    If we take Oneness to the next level, we come to understand that if you are connected to everything else, then you ARE Everything else. There is no “you”, “me”, “here”, “there”, “this” or “that” when All is One. There can be no “other”. In The Bhagavad Gita, Krishna refers to this as the “Self”, as do other advanced teachings such as Consciousness and the Absolute: The Final Talks of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj. Others have called it God, Universal Mind, Universe, All That Is, Life, Existence, Collective Consciousness, Creative Intelligence, Source, Pure Awareness, Presence, Spirit, Nature, Tao, Buddha, Christ, Self, Love, Energy, Divinity, Reality, Truth, The Absolute, The Infinite, Intuition, etc. It’s all one and the same thing, and it’s only the limited concepts of the mind, and the identification of those automatic thoughts as being “truth” and/or “me”, that makes us think otherwise. Words are limiting concepts that can’t possibly fully describe that which is Absolute and beyond the limitations of words, conceptual thinking, and form, so it really doesn’t matter what we call It.

    In the 3rd century Plotinus realized the Source of All. His teachings can be found in The Enneads: Abridged Edition (Penguin Classics) and/or Return to the One: Plotinus’s Guide to God-Realization.

    Just like the heart or lungs, the mind is going and going all by itself. Take 5 minutes to watch the mind and see for yourself. You can’t control it. You can’t stop it by controlling it, but you can (eventually) stop it by watching it. You are not the body and its senses. You are not the mind and its thoughts. You are the silent Awareness that is aware of them. Do you want to wholely and completely BE that Awareness of profound peace, silence, and happiness, which is the real You? Knowingly or unknowingly, this is why people practice meditation. That which you are knowingly or unknowingly seeking, is causing you to seek. It’s calling you to Itself. It’s calling you back Home from whence you came. Do you want to “remember” who/what you actually are?

    What exactly is Enlightenment/Self-Realization/No-Mind/Liberation, and why do we want it?
    It’s the complete and permanent dissolvement/cessation of all concepts, thoughts, and thinking of the ego/mind. It’s the letting go of the very energy behind thoughts and thinking. It’s the actual death of the thinking process of the mind. The individual’s self/ego/I literally dies. What you currently consider to be “me”, dies, and is no more. The ego/mind fears that life/existence will end when IT comes to an end, but this isn’t true. It’s the realization of what one already is, always was, and always will be, which is changeless and unlimited. It’s the realization of Self as All of Existence, which is Pure Awareness, which is beyond all form, shape, dimension, time, concepts, and the physicality of this world. It’s simply the letting go of the emotions, thoughts, and thinking that mask and stand in the way of the Infinite Intuitive Knowingness and Awareness of Absolute Truth. It’s for those who seek absolute and permanent completion, wholeness, perfection, freedom, peace, happiness, joy, bliss, etc. It’s a profound ineffable love, peace, stillness, and silence beyond bliss and ecstasy, which is well beyond words and description. It’s an innate knowingingness of the truths of the universe, because if “one” is Everything, then naturally, “one” knows everything. It precludes individual will, intentions, desires, wants, “needs”, emotions, personality, thoughts, ideas, concepts, and thinking. It’s not the denial of will. It’s for those who wish to serve the world/universe in the highest possible way, whatever that may happen to be, in this very moment, right now. It’s for those who want to let go of the little self; the me, myself & I, which is the source of all problems and suffering.

    Purposefully creating worldly “success” with thought (the law of attraction) is one goal, while moving beyond thought totally is a different goal altogether. One helps us cope with this physical world, while the other takes us beyond it forever (no more reincarnation). One perpetuates individual karma (positive & negative), while the other frees us of it permanently. “The truth shall set you free.”

    Real Spirituality
    Some people believe various psychic abilities, siddhis, and occult powers are “spiritual”, but the truly Enlightened warn otherwise and say “Forget about siddhis. They are all manifestations of the duality, therefore illusory. Do not seek them. It’s immaterial to spiritual realization. Find out who you are.” – From: Talks With Ramana Maharshi: On Realizing Abiding Peace and Happiness

    Just how does Enlightenment/Self-Realization/No-Mind/Liberation happen?
    Lao Tzu’s famous poetic Tao Te Ching: The Definitive Edition starts with the words “A way that can be walked is not The Way.” Realize that it has nothing to do with the intellect or scientific proof, but that of firsthand experiential verification. Realize that to truly know, rather than knowing ABOUT, involves BEING that which is to be known. Realize that the truth doesn’t need the approval of the human ego in order to be truth. Absolute Truth already is what it is. It can’t be created by the mind. Realize that because of karma and Free Will, EVERYTHING is perfect as it is, despite all the prevalent negativities in the world. Realize that everyone is simply being the level of “truth” that they are currently aware of, and that the truth is only for those who want it. Realize that people can’t help being that which they are. “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.” In The Words of Gandhi, “You must be the change you wish to see in the world”, and “..lose yourself in the service of others”. Realize that because everybody and everything is One, we change the world in far greater unseen ways as a result of what we ARE, compared to what we do. Realize that separation, duality, polarity and opposites do not actually exist. All is One, which is Self, which just Is. Realize that there is no duality of “love” and “evil”. There are only varying degrees of the absence of Love/Truth. Realize that space, distance, form, and time are ILLUSIONS created by LIMITED physical senses and ways of thinking. Realize that the physical body, and the AUTOMATIC random repetitive thoughts of the mind, are not the real “me” at all. Realize that you are the Awareness that is aware of the mind and its comings and goings. The more it’s watched, the more it disappears. Realize that everything and everyone is One. The observer and the observed are One. The knower and the known are One. A Course in Miracles says “…you both HAVE everything and ARE everything.” Realize that there is no duality, no opposites, and no polarity. Nothing can exist outside of Existence, otherwise it wouldn’t exist. Realize that even what the mind conceives and conceptualizes as being “nothing”, Void, Unmanifest, or Formlessness, is still within Existence. In the highly evolved The Zen Teaching of Huang-Po: On the Transmission of Mind it says “It is an existence which is no existence, a non-existence which is nevertheless existence. So this true Void does in some marvelous way ‘exist’.” Realize that there can only be varying degrees of things within Existence, like degrees on a thermometer. Realize that there is no individuality; no “you”, “me”, “this”, “that”, “here”, “there”, “inner”, “outer”, etc. Realize that there is no individual “me”, “myself”, “mine”, or “I”. Realize that there is no “doer” doing anything, because that would imply there is an “individual” to do something. Realize that since All is One, there can be no “other”, which means All is Self, or All is I. Realize that Enlightenment happens by ITSELF when the little self is left to fall away like a disrobed peice of clothing. Realize that there is absolutely NOTHING to be gotten, grasped, gained, obtained, or attained because The Absolute/Self/Buddha/God already Is. Realize that Awareness, Consciousness, and Knowing don’t require words, concepts, thoughts or thinking. Realize that EVERYTHING is an irrelevant concept. All thought and thinking is essentially worthless. It’s really just as “simple” as losing interest in all thought and thinking, right now, and not identifying thoughts as “me”, right now. Realize that without the ego/mind interfering, everything just IS. Nothing more, nothing less. All perceptions, views, opinions, beliefs, likes, and dislikes are irrelevant. Realize that The Absolute is not subject to change, and even “Is” is an irrelevant concept. Realize all of this… but not with words and concepts. Just let go.

    One sage says in his books, such as Be as You Are: The Teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi (Arkana), that “There will come a time when one will have to forget all that has been learned.” In I Am That: Talks with Sri Nisargadatta it’s explained that “When you demand nothing of the world, nor of God, when you want nothing, seek nothing, expect nothing, then the Supreme State will come to you uninvited and unexpected.”

    Using Zen and Buddhist terminology there’s the excellent The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation, The Zen Teaching of Bodhidharma: A Bilingual Edition, and The Zen Doctrine of No Mind: The Significance of the Sutra of Hui-Neng (Wei-Lang.

  96. dan e said on August 23rd, 2009 at 11:45am #

    hooboy. Mulga you made my day, anytime I get an approving word from you my self esteem goes up several notches:)

    Too many posters on this thread, two many pts need to be made. Shabnam covers at least a “plurality” of them but many remain.

    USF, to me you have advanced some of the most important issues, some I wd say positively, others IMHO negatively (that is, I disagree with large portions of your analysis).

    First the good news: IMO your discussion of Primitive Accumulation was really superb. I see there is a lot of scholarship and study behind your ideas.
    I also admired your pinpointing of the damage these Libertarian rethuglicans in human’s clothing have done to the ability to think clearly of the more recent cohorts of the newly mobilized “progressive” slash “antiwar” activists. Hegemony is maintained first of all by filling the minds of the unwary with false notions, second by sowing confusion among those who see something is wrong but don’t know what it is.
    However – here comes the bad news – when you leave the realm of classic Marx, you seem to start parroting a lot of stale ideas. I share your admiration for Hugo Chavez’ administration and policies, but to me some of the stuff you cite contradicts how he goes about things.

    Well, time has flown, I’ll get back to this, clarify what I’m talking about later. Have a good one!

    PS to Mikey Duhson: thanks for coming out of the Kloset and revealing your true personality. Sorry, if I’d have realized you were just another Zionist gunsel I’d never have said anything to you. Sayonara, chump, have a lousy day:)

  97. mary said on August 23rd, 2009 at 11:50am #

    US-F Could we please just have the links and not the links plus the whole article copied and pasted.

  98. Don Hawkins said on August 23rd, 2009 at 12:01pm #

    PEOPLE OF EARTH WE ARE IN DEEP DO DO.

    Twin Plagues Threaten Northern Forests

    HAINES JUNCTION, Yukon Territory
    (Aug. 23) – A veil of smoke settled over the
    forest in the shadow of the St. Elias Mountains,
    in a wilderness whose spruce trees
    stood tall and gray, a deathly gray even in
    the greenest heart of a Yukon summer.
    “As far as the eye can see, it’s all infested,”
    forester Rob Legare said, looking out
    over the thick woods of the Alsek River valley.
    Beetles and fire, twin plagues, are consuming
    northern forests in what scientists
    say is a preview of the future, in a century
    growing warmer, as the land grows drier,
    trees grow weaker and pests, abetted by
    milder winters, grow stronger.
    Dying, burning forests would then only
    add to the warming.
    It’s here in the sub-Arctic and Arctic — in
    Alaska, across Siberia, in northernmost Europe,
    and in the Yukon and elsewhere in
    northern Canada — that Earth’s climate is
    changing most rapidly. While average temperatures
    globally rose 0.74 degrees Celsius
    (1.3 degrees Fahrenheit) in the past century,
    the far north experienced warming at
    twice that rate or greater.
    In Russia’s frigid east, some average temperatures
    have risen more than 2 degrees
    Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), with midwinter
    mercury spiking even higher. And
    “eight of the last 10 summers have been extreme
    wildfire seasons in Siberia,” American
    researcher Amber J. Soja pointed out
    by telephone from central Siberia.
    Along with shrinking the polar ice cap
    and thawing permafrost, scientists say, the
    warming of the Arctic threatens to turn boreal
    forest — the vast cover of spruce, pine
    and other conifers blanketing these high
    latitudes — into less of a crucial “sink” absorbing
    carbon dioxide and more of a
    source, as megatons of that greenhouse gas
    rise from dead, burning and decaying
    wood.

  99. Deadbeat said on August 23rd, 2009 at 1:11pm #

    Let’s separate this out. This Chomsky-styled Zionism is a red herring you and Deadbeat use to deflect criticism of Petras and your positions. I for one am NOT a Chomsky-styled Zionist (and don’t expect to be any time soon).

    That’s right lets separate this out. What is “Chomkskyism”? The best way to understand what “Chomskyism” is to read the great critique by Jeffery Blankfort Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict

    Is bring up Chomsky a “red herring” as Mr. Shields asserts? Of course not because of the INFLUENCE that Noam Chomsky has on the ideology of the Left in the United States over the past generation and a half. It is important to understand how the Left has responded to the growing influence of this racist ideology. The fact is NO ONE ever denied that oil resources is a FACTOR in ME policy but there has been a HUGE OUTCRY of DENIAL on the Left regarding the influence of Zionism upon U.S. foreign policy and that DENIAL has been a huge factor in the failure to mobilize not only against Israeli Zionism but Zionism WITHIN the United States. This is the aspect that put Mr. Shields on par with Mr. Chomsky. Dr. Petras on the other hand bring this awareness of these aspects forward.

    Reactionaries like Mr. Shields unfortunately by attempting to silence this truth has essentially advance the “empire” more than they have challenged and confronted it. In fact these “Chomskyites” would rather see the Left remain in a state of discombobulation rather than CONFRONT Zionism as an RACIST IDEOLOGY that has influenced not only American foreign policy but it political economy as well.

    Capitalism and Racism are interconnected thus confronting Zionism IS CONFRONTING “empire”. It is that fact that Mr. Shields deigns.

  100. Deadbeat said on August 23rd, 2009 at 1:31pm #

    Another problem with the “Big Oil fallacy is that in 1948 — the year that Israel was “created” the United States was fairly self-sufficient in her oil needs. The United States did not need Middle East oil to serve her energy needs. It wasn’t until the 1970’s that the U.S. began to import larger quantities of oil. In fact the United States obtain most of her oil needs from Canada and Latin America.

    However in 1948 was the height of the Cold War and therefore the rivalry against the Soviet Union was the major reason for the U.S. involvement in the ME.

    Also the ideology of Zionism — a Jewish homeland in Palestine — was invented in the late 19th Century well before the influence of “Big Oil” and the United States Empire.

    Notice how these facts are omitted from Mr. Shields and the Chomskyites explanation of the “Big Oil” boogieman. These contradictions are ignored in order to justify their arguments which shows either cult-like thinking or the promotion of an agenda which in the end advance the interest of the “empire” they pretend to be confronting.

  101. B99 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 1:33pm #

    But USF – where do you stand on the Public Option in health care? Do you think that’s a step forward as a means toward single-payer – or are you merely hoping that things get so bad that people opt for communism?

  102. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 1:33pm #

    cynic, max,
    it is not a fact to me that there wldn’t have been an israel if it wasn’t for this oil.
    It is a conclusion that christo-talmudic bloc established a state for ‘jews’ because of oil.

    I conclude that the oil belonged de facto to the imperia. Any attempt to manipualate prices or flow of oil, with or w.o. israel, wld have been a casus belli.
    And all christian lands, i firmly conclude, including communist, wld have attacked any muslim land for any unilateral decision by any land and not just muslim.

    actually, i infer, UN wld have been overjoyed to attack a muslim land for any real or even perceived infraction.
    Establishment of israel cost christian lands $tns, even tho israel now as then had been a burden that had to be carried by christians and yet israel was of no tactical or strategic value to the west.
    as afgh’n, iraq proves, nato and US are alone engaged in warfare against these lands.

    israel appears to me is just a base for smuggling drugs and body parts.
    israel, armed, it seems, with best arms and being alegedly fourth strongest army, cld not beat a few thousand fighters in lebanon in `06.
    As the gazan raid had proven, all that IOF is capable of , is missiling from air or bombarding from tanks; killing at least 1K civs and destroying buildings.

    The question is, Why an israel? For west? Well, i say we don`t know? Was it just a move by dimwits? Or twelth crusade? Or was it, Well, we are killing “them“, the bad muslims? We got nukes, submarines, naval ships, tanks, aircraft, wmd, etc.,
    “them“ got nothing. tnx

  103. Max Shields said on August 23rd, 2009 at 1:56pm #

    bozhidar balkas vancouver, Never said there wouldn’t be an Israel if not for oil…there simply wouldn’t have been the kind of Israel we see today. Israel, like Dubai, United Arab Emirates, is made possible by oil and fossil energy. There is really little land which can be farmed, and water is a relatively scarce resource. All must be sustained through incredible quantities of fossil energy, without which there would simply be nomadic tribes crossing the great sand dunes of the region.

    The existence of something called Israel may have occurred, but it wouldn’t be what we know today.

  104. Max Shields said on August 23rd, 2009 at 2:04pm #

    Deadbeat no one is saying Israel was created for reasons of oil in the Middle East, but you must read your history better to understand the deal between Roosevelt and Saud family and the price of oil. Yes, then, the US had significant oil reserves – no longer. But Israel was not simply the creation of the US.

    Today most of the world’s reserves are in the Middle East – though this is reaching peak as it did in the USA and that has nothing to do with Zionism.

    The oil industry back then was in a major “war” over controlling sources and regional hegemony. But that should not be confused with Big Oil and the invasion of Iraq in 1991 or 2003.

  105. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 4:21pm #

    max, so cynic had not quoted or parphrased u accurately. tnx

  106. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 4:23pm #

    max, or i may have misunderstood the statement!? tnx

  107. bozhidar balkas vancouver said on August 23rd, 2009 at 4:59pm #

    deadbeat,
    even a mn chomskys wld have not, methinks, even delayed wars against afgh’n and iraq let alone prevented or stopped once under way.
    In addition, chomsky had not renounced, as far as i know, anarchism.
    I’ve read several of his books. But i haven’t come across his support of some basic human rights.

    Among them being the right to return, to obtain free higher education, nationalization of forests, mines, etc.
    if i am in error, i’d like to be corrected.
    chomsky, if my memory serves me, blames to quite a degree communist misrule for failure to hold onto socialism but omits the fact that USSR had spend too much on arms instead on houses, healthcare, education, etc.
    And, even tho, armed with WMD, soviet citizens had to live in constant fear of mad fascists of US, japan, UK, et al.

    One of the factors in subsequent break up of yugoslavia and ussr had been strong fascism, in both empires. Also muslims due to their cult make poor socialists.
    I think, having some knowledege of yugoslav socialism, the widespread corruption of socalled socialists and maybe also socialists was the main cause for break up of yugosavia.
    yes, nationalism was another cause for the break up. Nevertheless, i accepted yugoslavia and never wished it break up.
    one of the reasons for my stance had been that my home twn along with nearly all villages and twns along the e. adriatic coast joined partisans.
    methinks, i wld have been a strong proponent of healthcare, right to be informed; of free education, nationalization of most industries, even if my folk had been fascist.
    half of croatia now is fascists even tho croatia wld have been much smaller had it not been for tito’s partizani.
    so much for gratitude! tnx

  108. B99 said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:01pm #

    The US/Saudi OIL relationship goes back a long ways now. Control over oil and the need to stave off the Soviet Union have always been the motivating factors behind US geopolitics in the Middle East.

    In 1933, Saudi Arabia and the United States established diplomatic relations, and that year the kingdom granted a concession to Standard Oil of California (now Chevron) to explore and to produce oil. During World War II the United States wanted assurance from Saudi Arabia concerning supplies of oil, needed to wage war. In February 1945, following the conference with Stalin and Churchill at Yalta in the Crimea, President Roosevelt and King ibn Saud met aboard a ship docked in the Suez Canal. There, Roosevelt and King Saud concluded a secret agreement in which the U.S. would provide Saudi Arabia military security — military assistance, training and building a military base at Dhahran in Saudi Arabia — in exchange for secure access to supplies of oil.

    Israel did not become a decisive factor in US policy until the Johnson Administration. Today, Russia is no longer a factor, but a perceived threat of growing Chinese influence preoccupies some in the State Department. Oil is, of course, huge for all US administrations and the effort is to keep compliant strongmen in place throughout the region. Saddam used to be but went astray in trying to absorb Kuwait into Iraq. That’s a no-no because it meant that Iraq was consolidating oil power that the US wanted to remain divvied up. Israel, for its part, has no trouble with Arab Strongmen as long as they keep it domestic and don’t agitate for any sort of Pan-Arab unity.

    One place Kuwait and US differed was on Iraqi Kurdistan. US wanted no part of splitting up Iraq into constituencies. Israel correctly realized that once the independence genie was out of the bottle there was no getting it back in. Israel is cashing in its chips even as we write. Of course, the Kurds deserve to have their own state. But the Arabs and Persians are going to have to move fast and true to head off a Kurdistan that has warm relations with Israel.

  109. Max Shields said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:03pm #

    Please read what I wrote.

  110. Michael Dawson said on August 23rd, 2009 at 5:56pm #

    What a menagerie around here.

    Dan e feels it valid to conclude that anybody who asks him to think is a Zionist. I guarantee you Dan, that you are ten times the racist that I am a Zionist. I won’t bother to comment on your analytical skills, which are scant to none, obviously.

    If Chomsky and I are Zionists, then that’s fine. That tells you all you need to know about the level of analysis of this Petras pile.

    Meanwhile, Deadbeat, you think the U.S. entered the Middle East in 1948 without thinking about it’s own oil needs and shortcomings for the future? Wow. Again, some remedial thinking might help you a great deal. This is all Basic History 101, well documented, if you bother to look…

    A snarling attitude isn’t going to cut it if we want to save this planet. If you want to make things better, you have to know your arse from a mole hill…

  111. Max Shields said on August 23rd, 2009 at 7:06pm #

    B99 fne job with the history…but hopefully you’re not trying to get through to the “true believers” of Petras version of reality in the Middle East.

  112. Deadbeat said on August 23rd, 2009 at 7:46pm #

    Michael Dawson writes…

    Meanwhile, Deadbeat, you think the U.S. entered the Middle East in 1948 without thinking about it’s own oil needs and shortcomings for the future? Wow. Again, some remedial thinking might help you a great deal. This is all Basic History 101, well documented, if you bother to look…

    I never made a claim that the U.S. never thought about its oil needs. What I did say imply is that there is a contradiction between the “Big Oil” boogieman and the U.S. backing the creation of Isreal in 1948 as the U.S. demand for foreign oil was far removed. However that 1948 was the height of the COLD WAR and that preventing Soviet influence was paramount.

    Apparently Micheal you’d rather engage in hyperbolic rhetoric than discussion.

  113. Shabnam said on August 23rd, 2009 at 9:07pm #

    dan e, Deadbeat and Mulga:

    Thank you for your contributions and support of Professor James Petras who tells nothing but the TRUTH. However, his analysis has been criticized by the Iranian fifth columnists attacking Petras who refuses to call the Iranian election ‘fraud’ like the closet zionists active at ZMAG. Saeed Ranema, an Iranian Professor of Political Science at York University, Canada, in “The Tragedy of Left’s Discourse on Iran” to critic Petras for his view on Iranian election at Zmag – where financially is supported by Ms. Foundation led by Gloria Steinem, a CIA agent, and Ford :

    {One of the most shocking pieces is by the renowned controversial Left writer and academic, James Petras. In his piece “Iranian Elections: ‘The Stolen Elections’ Hoax,” Petras conclusively denies any wrongdoings in the Iranian elections and confidently goes into the detail of the demographics of some small Iranian towns, with no credibility or expertise in the subject.}

    Rahnema, whose father was minister of Education, during the Shah, is embedded in the Zionist west and has close association with HOPI and Zmag. Noam Chomsky, Zmag, supports HOPI and Campaign for Peace and Democracy, CPD, where their main policy is to divert attention from Zionism and present ISLAM as the main enemy in the region and the world. Noam Chomsky has full cooperation with CPD, a phony ‘anti war’ organization and a US gov. front, like during the cold war, and has signed all their misleading petitions which contributes to expansion of the war in the middle east and beyond according to Oded Yinon, the Israeli strategy. CPD’s slogan, neither US aggression nor Saddam oppression was very important to bring CONFUSSION to create divisiveness among uninformed American people to make them passive and indifferent. CPD has the same slogan – neither US aggression nor theocracy – for Iran, where Chomsky has signed their petition. Many Iranians send angry letters to CPD and condemned their misleading slogan which cleverly designed to beat on the war drum to help the neocons. These petitions have been signed by Chomsky as well.
    Interestingly enough, HOPI has identical slogan where Chomsky has signed. Both organizations are mainly Trotskyst. Many believe Trotsky and Stalin are both sides of the same coin which makes sense.
    American empire like British Empire is CONTROLED BY those who control the economic system and the money. Who is controlling the money? In 1815 Nathan Mayer Rothschild makes the following statement:

    {I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply. }

    Today, the same family and its extension control the blood of the world that is in fact responsible for the creation apartheid and racist and terrorist entity in a source rich religion.

    We can ask the same question from the closet Zionists: WHO CONTROLS THE AMERICAN EMPIRE?
    American empire is controlled by money. Who controls that? Those who control British Empire are mainly ‘Zionist Jews.’ They are not from the Hebrew people of the region who never left the region and married among themselves and with other groups where live side by side in peace. These zionists have come from abroad as colonists who have nothing to do with our region. THEY ARE FOREIGNERS.

    These people are mainly from a place called Khazaria, which occupied the land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea which is now predominantly occupied by Georgia. These people call themselves ‘Jewish’ because the Khazars under the instruction of the King, converted to the Jewish faith in 740 A.D., but of course that did not include converting their Asiatic Mongolian genes to the genes of the Jewish people. Noam Chomsky who prefers to live in occupied Palestine, most likely, his ancestors converted to Judaism in the central Asia and he really has no connection to Palestine.

    In short, the Rothschilds created modern banking, international banking, global bonds, and every other type of finance available. Today, they are busy “privatizing” the assets of the world and taking control of toll roads, water companies, electric companies, space, infrastructure, etc. It is the central banking system that controls the monetary system of the world, as well as, the investors in the central banks, including royalty such as the King and Queen of England and other international bankers, of which the Schiffs, Morgan’s, Lazard Freres, and Rothschild’s are part.

    In 1870, the Rothschilds formed the world’s second largest oil producer, the Caspian and Black Sea Petroleum Company. In 1910 Henry Ditterding (Royal Dutch Petroleum) and Marcus Samuel (Shell Transport and Trading Company) began acquiring Caucasian oilfields. In 1912, they approached De Rothschild Freres, who had his own oil fields in the Caspian and Black Seas. The new company became known as Royal Dutch Shell in 1912, and is the second largest oil company in the world. Rothschild were instrumental in creation of racist state of Israel where no country in the region voted for creation of Israel where the world has seen nothing but destruction, terrorism, to steal land, occupation, assassination, destabilization, division, partition and more.

    As a Saudi king said: Why don’t Germans give the best part of Germany to the victims of holocaust? Why Palestinians and people of the region must suffer for their crimes?

    The Zionists control American empire. Clinton ,Obama, Biden, the senate, the congress, the WH , all nothing are but puppets, as Rothschild said in 1815.

    A number of Rothschilds were instrumental in populating Palestine back in the late 1890s, were involved with the first Zionist Congress in Basel in 1893, and with the founding of the State of Israel, as well as financing it. Edmond de Rothschild worked closely with Lord Balfour and Lloyd George in getting the Balfour Declaration to create the State of Israel.

    Iraq invasion is part of the permanent war to expand the Zionist interests in the region and the world. These actions are taken finally to establish ‘world government’ which is ‘Jewish’ and its center is located in stolen Jerusalem. Therefore, everyone must be united against ‘world government’ and privatization which is supported by the banking system and all are based on profit. This is the power behind Zionism plus their committed Zionists, closet and overt.
    Karl Marx said this about central banking:

    {By means of the banking system the distribution of capital is taken out of the hands of the private capitalists and usurers. But at the same time, banking and credit thus become the most effective means of driving capitalist production beyond its own boundaries, and one of the most potent instruments of crises and swindles.}

    The world is control by Zionists and a war is waged to expand their influence and their interests, not yours and mine. Wake up and be united against Zionism.

  114. Deadbeat said on August 24th, 2009 at 2:17am #

    B99 writes …

    The US/Saudi OIL relationship goes back a long ways now. Control over oil and the need to stave off the Soviet Union have always been the motivating factors behind US geopolitics in the Middle East.

    So B99 why would the U.S. back the creation of Israel if it “Big Oil” had such power?

    Why would the USA would risk its relationship with the Saudi’s to back the State of Israel?

    This contradiction goes unexplained by the “War for Oil” advocates. The answer by the Chomskyite is that Israel is the USA “junior partner” Really? Why not just pay the Saudis to keep the Arabs under control? Why not practice the same kind neo-colonialism strategy like it has done in Latin America and hire the local thugs and oligarchs rather than further antagonize the locals with a group and a people not of the same background and culture. This contradiction goes unexplained and unmentioned by the Chomskyites.

    So B99, thanks for highlighting the contradiction and advance the very point I’ve been making.

  115. Deadbeat said on August 24th, 2009 at 2:45am #

    More critiques from Jeffrey Blankfort…

    [Noam] Chomsky himself is no more inclined to accept criticism than his supporters. As one critic put it, “His attitude to who those who disagree with him, is, by and large, one of contempt. The only reason they can’t see the simple truth of what he’s saying is that they are, in one way or another, morally deficient.”

    Although I [Jeffrey Blankfort] had previously criticized Chomsky for downplaying the influence of the pro-Israel lobby on Washington’s Middle East policies, I had hesitated to write a critique of his overall approach for the reasons noted. Nevertheless, I was convinced that while, ironically, having provided perhaps the most extensive documentation of Israeli crimes, [Chomsky] had, at the same time immobilized, if not sabotaged, the development of any serious effort to halt those crimes and to build an effective movement in behalf of the Palestinian cause.

    An exaggeration? Hardly. A number of statements made by Chomsky have demonstrated his determination to keep Israel and Israelis from being punished or inconvenienced for the very monumental transgressions of decent human behavior that he himself has passionately documented over the years. This is one of the glaring contradictions in Chomsky’s work. He would have us believe that Israel’s occupation and harsh actions against the Palestinians, its invasions and undeclared 40 years war on Lebanon, and its arming of murderous regimes in Central America and Africa during the Cold War, has been done as a client state in the service of US interests. In Chomsky’s world view, that absolves Israel of responsibility and has become standard Chomsky doctrine.

  116. Deadbeat said on August 24th, 2009 at 2:58am #

    Shabnam writes …

    As a Saudi king said: Why don’t Germans give the best part of Germany to the victims of holocaust? Why Palestinians and people of the region must suffer for their crimes?

    Again B99, Max Shields and other “Chomskyites” please explain if “Big Oil” has such overwhelming power why would they want to ANTAGONIZE the Arab oil states by backing the creation of Israel which would only sour their business arrangements and make doing business with the Arabs only more difficult?

    The main reason why Harry Truman supported the creation of Israel was because he was running for re-election in 1948 in a very tight three-way race against Thomas Dewey (the Republican) and Harry Wallace (the Progressive third party candidate) and needed the Jewish vote and money in order to win. It was also the reason why Truman advocated a national health care program in order to steal an issue form the Progressive Wallace.

    It is clear that Chomskyism has really help to create an IGNORANCE and VACUUM on the Left and why the “Left” is so damn impotent, divided, confused and demoralized.

    To U-S-F, the Libertarians and the Right is NOT the problem. The enemy is a lot closer than you think. Look to your “Left”.

  117. Deadbeat said on August 24th, 2009 at 3:12am #

    deadbeat, even a mn chomskys wld have not, methinks, even delayed wars against afgh’n and iraq let alone prevented or stopped once under way. In addition, chomsky had not renounced, as far as i know, anarchism. I’ve read several of his books. But i haven’t come across his support of some basic human rights.

    The issue bozh is that Chomsky has NOT spoken out against the growing influence of Zionism in the UNITED STATES. We know that Israel is Zionist. That is the basis of its existence BUT in the United Stated we had a movement against Racism that to a degree altered behaviors. It was a blow to empire and in order to protect the empire they had to destroy groups like the Black Panther and the Young Lords whose ideology was based on Marxism.

    However Chomsky has used is influence to DIVERT the Left away from anti-racist and Marxist ideology and substituted it with a perverse ideology that has CRIPPLED the Left and essentially advances the empire.

    Confronting RACISM is vital to confront empire and these lame-ass “closet Zionism” that is pervasive on the Left is a major reason why the Left today is impotent to provide any solidarity against not only Zionism but neo-liberal Capitalism as well.

  118. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 4:16am #

    So, this is all about Chomsky/Petras. What a pity I thought facts might actually have a role.

    The thrust of Petras’s piece here is that Zionism was the motive behind US invasion into Iraq not “Big Oil”.

    I’ve yet to notice anyone here making the case that “Big Oil” was behind the Iraq invasion. But the syllogism: “If Big Oil was not behind the invasion of Iraq, than by Zionism was” is just plain junk logic.

    It is primarily about oil and whatever other resources are central to US empire. Who controls it is the name of the game.

    The Middle East is in a kind of “no man’s land” which is pivotal to Asia and the West and it has, still, the largest reserves of oil…though the Saudis are very secretative about exactly how much. They have been the swing arbiter of price since the 1970s when US oil peaked.

  119. bozh said on August 24th, 2009 at 5:38am #

    may be it is the planet, the world [i am casting the widest look possible] plutos are after but in gradational manner.
    It seems to me the world plutos are now united firmly!? Why? And, rich countries wage wars only against weak and disfunctional lands and empires. Why?
    So what is just afpak, syria, iraq, iran? Why settle for so little? “Them” got no wmd but vast resources!? And, we are wealthy because we are a grade up on these darkies. And, we must not only maintain our wealth and control but also augment them.
    I ask, Aren’t we much like apes? Did u watch a chimp gather bananas? having a claspful already, s/he picks two, three more, only to drop three, four, five.
    The dumb ape had not as yet built a basket to hold his wealth in or hired a cudgelchimp to guard it for her/him, but his s’mwhat wiser brother had.
    yes we got bananas and baskets to store them in. And once gathering started- and as long as there are goodies left to gather- we keep gathering and gathering.
    Is israel just a hell for pal’ns? Isn’t it tiny, impoverished? Even 70% of ‘jews’ shun it! It may be just a transit military base for nato and US.
    be it as it may, no one, as far as i know, had offered any evidence that israhell is of any value, save political. Or as a curioso and a passing fancy? tnx

  120. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 5:58am #

    {So, this is all about Chomsky/Petras. What a pity I thought facts might actually have a role.}

    Max: why do you reduce Zionism to this line? The reason behind Chomsky is that he has been promoted to “public intellectual’ of the world whose word and action influences certain groups important necessary for Zionism to control and manipulate in order to re-arrange the map to bring the world under ONE WORLD with ONE FLAG . This is the goal of Zionism. You, however, reduce Zionism to ‘Israel’. Zionism is world government with a center in Jerusalem.

    The reason for creation of Israel is not to create ‘homeland’ for Jews. The Jews (Hebrews) were already living in the region with other groups side by side in peace. The creation of Israel with the pretext of holocaust industry, chosen people industry, Anti Semite industry, and other industries is part of the plan necessary to control the world with its resources under ‘jewish aristocry.’ Thus, the first step is stealing all of Palestine and creation of a racist state by the name of ‘Jewish state’ to create tension and hatred among people, including the indigenous Jews, to put one against the other, to destabilize the region and bring the resource undercontrol of Zionism, Rothschild family and its extension. Rothschild, “Jewish” aristocracy led the British empire and now leading American empire through control of money and profit and waging wars to re arrange the map in support of Zionism, control of the world with its resources under ONE FLAG, where Jerusalem is the center.

  121. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 7:10am #

    I agree Israel was created out of a fictitous notion of “homeland”, but I don’t think it was the center of what was going on.

    Remember the whole region is the creation of Western colonialism, Israel was one, foreign though it is, piece to that imperial/post-colonial legacy.

    This is not in denial of Zionism as an extreme nationalistic ideology which has made life a living hell for Palestinians, but the full history is that all of this is a challenge of major proportion to the oligarchies that control many of the nation-states created by the former and current empires.

    As Israel lives by its “enemies”, so do these oligarchical puppets of the West live by the existence of a “common enemy” – Israel.

    The people in the region suffer the consequences of this pathological relationship of hate and demonization.

    As the world’s oil reduces drastically, the Middle East will not become less of a focus of war and aggression, but it will rich a fevor pitch until, the oil in those parts are depleted as they are on their way of doing right now.

    The area, like most of the world’s population will drastically contract, Israel, with its incredible oil dependency, will dissolve.

    The region with its population explosion has far exceeded the carrying capacity for what the earth can provide those people. It has been done almost exclusively through fossil – specifically oil. As oil peaks and recedes, so will the regions population…as it will here and elsewhere.

  122. Don Hawkins said on August 24th, 2009 at 7:26am #

    And just maybe there is no plan whatever comes first then as now whatever is the easy way. Is it time for lunch yet. Maybe take a vacation. Go shopping and above all don’t help the people who want to try no money in it. Not knowledge but stupidity.

  123. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 8:39am #

    {Remember the whole region is the creation of Western colonialism, Israel was one, foreign though it is, piece to that imperial/post-colonial legacy.}

    Who are behind the ‘western colonialism’ for the past 250 years? It is the Rothschild house that runs the Western colonialism for the past, at least, 250 years. In 1815 Nathan Rothschild said:

    {I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.}

    He knew exactly what he was saying. The ‘jewish’ aristocracy, Rothchields and its associates, are in control of the Western colonialism for centuries where their wealth and influence dramatically increased after the Napoleon war where France was defeated. This family through lies and deception made other investors to sell their stocks very cheap; we see repetition of this trick many times, in the state of panic believing that England was the loser in the war. The ‘jewish’ aristocracy became the richest family in the world and since then, according to its own member of the family, they control the ‘western colonialism’ with supremacist tendency, establishment of Israel, to bring the world under their control through money and use of ‘International Law.’

    In terms of resources, we are not talking about oil alone. The same people, ‘jewish’ aristocracy, are in control of the Gold, the Silver, the cobalt, the cupper and so on and so forth. All are vital to bring the world under full control. United against zionism and its actors.

    http://www.rense.com/general75/wrus.htm

  124. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 9:21am #

    Western colonization began way before Rothschild and began long before the British empire.

    No doubt, UK played a major role in the subdivision of the Middle East, most of which happened during the 1930s/40s.

    But my point was not to hunt down a Jewish ancestrial connection from Britians financial empire, but that the whole of the Middle East (with one or two exceptions and even they were touched) are the creation of Western empires. Saudi Arabia was created just a couple of decades before Israel. This is not anscient history we’re talking about.

    The indigenous people regardless of heritage or religion lived in the region primarily as nomads. Mesopotamia and the Nile area we call Egypt are anscient civilizations. But Iraq is, as we know, an invention of the Western powers.

    What exists today is the result of Western colonialism and oil. The conflicts are sustained through geopolitical turmoil that the “governments” in the region have inflamed from time to time to control the larger population. Israel is a Western beachhead, that has evolved from Soviet proxy war days, and has emerged to reframe their purpose to the West, as a means to guard US/Western oil interests.

    Again, the people suffer this post-colonialism, as is the case in much of Africa.

  125. bozh said on August 24th, 2009 at 9:37am #

    had or has anyone noticed that mussolini’s or hitlers’s fascisms were the worst ever fascisms.
    Democracy, any, appears better or much better form of M’s an H’s fascism. US democracy being by far the best form of fascism!
    And, as of late, the fascist structure now in an incipient stage of franco’s or mussolini’s fascism.
    All this, and i haven’t even defined any form of fascism. Use ur own heads and define it. Or, better yet, tell kids what a fascist empire or state does. tnx

  126. Don Hawkins said on August 24th, 2009 at 9:58am #

    Whoever is in control is now in control of an out of control system. Whoever has been running the show is are not to bright. One too many dinner party’s I guess. I still say stupidity and or just lazy. Remember the ship Earth and the three deck’s well so far it looks like the work done by the lower and middle deck is all for nothing as the upper deck just keeps singing God bless America over and over and yes tell’s us we love you we love you very very much thank you. Thank’s but no thank’s it’s time for reason, knowledge, imagination, hard work, working together lose the suit and tie people this isn’t going to be easy.

  127. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 10:37am #

    {Western colonization began way before Rothschild and began long before the British empire.}

    Who cares about when did ‘Western colonization’ begin? As long as people live, there has been exploitation regardless of ‘ancestry.’ Mesopotamia and the Nile area including Egypt that you are referring too at one time was UNDER CONTROL OF PERSIAN EMPIRE. Persian Empire controlled Mesopotamia, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, and Egypt up to Libya. Persian Empire controlled vast amount of territories from India, Afghanistan, Georgia, Dagestan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan and so on and so forth. Why no one is offended when people are talking about Persians. Why are you so concerned about ‘jewish’ aristocracy to be mentioned here?

    Anyway, the date of western colonization is not important regarding Zionism. What is important to see who and who the empires are control and who control the empire, western colonization.

    {Saudi Arabia was created just a couple of decades before Israel. This is not anscient history we’re talking about.}

    Saudi Arabia was created by destabilization of Ottoman territories to create puppet state to bring the resources under the control of British Empire which was controlled by Rothschild family and its associates. Saudi Arabia is also a target. It is not surprising to see Saudis have been turned into stooges of the Zionism in the region to save their corrupt ‘kingdom’ and are killing their own people to survive the brutality of supremacists. ISLAM is a target.
    Today, the center of action is the United States. Tomorrow will be somewhere else, most likely, Canada and Austria. However, one thing, up to now, is clear that ‘jewish’ aristocracy is controlling the world direction towards ‘world government’ The Zionists influence on world events cannot be denied.

    {What exists today is the result of Western colonialism and oil.}

    Why do you reduce everything to oil? Empires were built and flourished for centuries without this commodity. Oil is one resource as important as Gold, Nickel, Diamond, Uranium and other resources. Rothschild and its associates have control over many resources including Diamond where has taken millions of African lives to control it.

  128. b99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 10:53am #

    The US backing the creation of Israel had little or nothing to do with Big Oil. It had to do with the influence of prominent Jews in the US, the fact that prominent Christians in the US were amenable to a Jewish Palestine, to the fact that both the 1st and 2nd worlds (West and East bloc) wanted to ‘solve’ the Jewish refugee dilemma (albeit on another’s turf), and guilt over either killing Jews or letting it happen. And it had to do with Europe – led by Britain – making a Jewish state pretty much a fait accompli by the end of the War. Further, Palestinians were viewed as a lesser people – as miscellaneous Arabs who could just move over or move out in asmuch as their existence in Palestine was a mere artifact compared to the principle of restoring Jews to their ancient homeland. Finally, the US was a lesser player in the Israel affair – it was Britain that made it all possible.

    The House of Saud was not overly concerned with Palestine, but instead far more concerned with retaining power over most of the peninsula. They have always been willing to engage in trade-offs that aid their power and fill their coffers. Saudi Arabia, in fact, as contributed little historically to the cause of Palestine – and has been largely silent on the issue (2002 peace offer notwithstanding) – at the behest of the US.

    I would say that there is no junior partner in the relationship of Israel and the US. Israel exercises outsized influence on the US on issues that directly effect Israel in the region, somewhat less so on other regional issues. On matters that Israel can get to both houses of congress on, Israel exercises something approaching control over US policy. For example, Obama is now trying to make the case that ANY more settlement growth is anti-peace. He knows not to call for the dismantlement of settlements – there would be a lynch mob at the White House. Yet, he’s going to find both houses condemning even his modest efforts, they are Israel’s Amen Corner. (Buchanan is right about this.)

    Yet Israel knows they can push things only so far. Israel largely meshes its policies with that of the US, such as oil. If it meant that the US had to choose between Israel or oil, Israel would accomodate itself to US policy.

    *********************************************

    This contradiction goes unexplained by the “War for Oil” advocates. The answer by the Chomskyite is that Israel is the USA “junior partner” Really? Why not just pay the Saudis to keep the Arabs under control? Why not practice the same kind neo-colonialism strategy like it has done in Latin America and hire the local thugs and oligarchs rather than further antagonize the locals with a group and a people not of the same background and culture. This contradiction goes unexplained and unmentioned by the Chomskyites.

    So B99, thanks for highlighting the contradiction and advance the very point I’ve been making.

  129. b99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 10:56am #

    The content below the line of asterisks in my last post was supposed to be deleted. It’s not mine.

  130. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 11:15am #

    Why do you reduce everything to oil?

    Because, Shabnam, that’s pretty much all the region offers the West and large scale developing nations like China and India.

    In some places it Uranium or other precious metals, some of which are critical to industrialisation….but the Middle East happens to have oil…if not the area would be regarded as a foresaken beach without water…

    This in no way is a statement about the people of the region…but about how the imperialism regardless, as you say, whether its the Ottoman Empire or Persian, or Roman…it’s all about domination to control resources…what ever the area has to offer that the empire needs for whatever purpose.

    By the way, I’m not weighing in on why Israel was created…there is much that has evolved since.

    I’m talking about the reason why the region is important to USA interests NOW. After the 70s the oil world (not so much Big Oil, let’s stop confusing the two) change. The USA hit peak oil, and was no longer able to call the shots, and at that point the Middle East, OPEC, became the swing arbiter of price and overall control.

    The dynamics changed and with it a change in policy; first vis a vis the Soviet Union and then as the region began to reject (not the governments) but a growing faction of Muslims, the US and Western presence. The events are well documented and do not need to be repeated…blowback was the name of the game along with asymmetrical warfare.

    China, almost overnight, along with India, became competors (with Russia) for scarce resources – OIL. Big Oil is a conduit for a thirsty empire that CANNOT survive without oil.

  131. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 11:50am #

    Deadbeat wrote:
    “Also the ideology of Zionism — a Jewish homeland in Palestine — was invented in the late 19th Century well before the influence of “Big Oil” and the United States Empire.

    But this ideology went nowhere until it was sponsored by the British in 1917 who took over Palestine from the turks.
    At that time oil was discovered in Persia , Iraq with predictions of more discoveries allover the middle East since the geology is the same.
    With that said, I don’t mean to let zionism off the hook. Zionism is a racist, ugly, cruel philosophy and is pure evil and should be confronted whether it is exploited by others or it is expoiting others.

  132. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 12:07pm #

    Deadbeat wrote:
    “Another problem with the “Big Oil fallacy is that in 1948 — the year that Israel was “created” the United States was fairly self-sufficient in her oil needs. The United States did not need Middle East oil to serve her energy needs. It wasn’t until the 1970’s that the U.S. began to import larger quantities of oil. In fact the United States obtain most of her oil needs from Canada and Latin America.”
    _____________________________________________________

    Even now most of the US oil needs in addition to its domestic production are covered by oil imported from Mexico, Canada and Venezuela. Very little oil is imported from the M.E.
    The oil of the M.E is exported to Japan and the rest of the world.
    As you see this a source of tremendous wealth and the ability to control for the US.

  133. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 12:17pm #

    MaxShield wrote:
    “No doubt, UK played a major role in the subdivision of the Middle East, most of which happened during the 1930s/40s.”

    The division of the Middle East happened after WWI in the treaty of Versai.

  134. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 12:18pm #

    {But this ideology went nowhere until it was sponsored by the British in 1917 who took over Palestine from the turks.}

    Who control the fu**ing British Empire? It was Rothschilds. the following statement made a century before WWI. Rothschilds were controling the world since Nepolian defeat. Nathan said:

    {I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.}

    Who created state of Israel? Again, Rothschilds were instrumental. Without their influence and control of British Empire no Israel would have been created.

    {The House of Saud was not overly concerned with Palestine, but instead far more concerned with retaining power over most of the peninsula.}

    This is BS. You are looking at the events of the past 20 years. The Arabs including the Saudi king, Al Faisal, did not want to partition
    Palestine. He said: give the best part of Germany to the victims.
    Now, as the result of the zionist power, almost all Arab head of states, especially Saudis, Egyptian, and others have embedded as the zionist stooges to serve Israel’s interest contrary to Arab population.

  135. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 12:29pm #

    MaxShield wrote:
    “The indigenous people regardless of heritage or religion lived in the region primarily as nomads. Mesopotamia and the Nile area we call Egypt are anscient civilizations. But Iraq is, as we know, an invention of the Western powers.”

    No Max No. You are absolutely wrong this time. What you wrote above might be true for Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arabian Peninsula, but for the rest of the M.E. , including Palestine , most people lived in cities or as farmers all along the rivers. Very few lived nomadic lives.

  136. b99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 12:39pm #

    Actually Shabnam, as per the Hussein/McMahon Correspondence Southwest Asia was not to be partitioned at all – it was to be free of foreign rule. The Brits betrayed that. By the time Israel came into being, however, the region had been split up something like 16 ways. It really does not matter what Faisal said about Germany. The Saudis provided little support to Palestine in the battle against the Jews.

    And, as powerful as the Rothschilds were, you grant them too much. What you are doing is relieving the Brits of all agency (as you also do with their hegemonic successors in the region – the US) .

    Zionism is a powerful political movement enough, with enormous negative consequences for much of the world, without making it into a Frankenstein monster.

  137. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 1:05pm #

    Synic3,

    Yes there were settlements along rivers, and there were and are farms…that’s the way the species generally lives. The point, however is that the region as a whole has a limited (as is always true in some proportion) arable land and that that land is very limited in its capacity to sustain large populations. The region has grown (as it is true for the planet inhabited by homo sapiens) in population far beyond what any kind of subsistence farming could sustain.

    When Palestinians and others in the region farmed it was first to feed oneself and family, surplus went to the village and little may have gone beyond. That is subsistance farming; it is what the earth allows us to have unless….we amplify our existence or energy through some earthly source – haha OIL. We force water irrigation from further and further away, and all driven by high intensity fossil based pumping system.

    My argument, if you follow it, is that this energy souce, limited by many factors beyond human control, has allowed that region to grow.

    Just look at Dubai, UAE. It is a city that has nothing but oil from which to build its metropolis; hotels underground, artificial seas, and the tallest building in the world and on and on. Israel is another case of an oasis created by fossil.

    As oil depletes, it is and will continue to, then these testiments to the power of OIL will collapse, and the populations will shrink drastically. Needless to say, it won’t be unique to the ME nor will it be without incredible human tragedy…but suffice it to say it is what “we” collectively built and now must pay the price for our overindulgence.

    So, perhaps, Palestinians will not become nomads, but their numbers will recede significantly as will all others. And Israel and Dubai, UAE (for examples) will be like the lost island of Atlantis.

    Not to understand this is simply to not understand what makes the civilized world, regardless of gods or ideologies, go round.

  138. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 1:15pm #

    B99:

    Did you read the link I have posted? Your position is misleading.
    Your views on:
    2 state solution
    Kurdistan independent
    Sudan genocide

    and so on and so forth is misleading. Are you going to punish all the British people, like the Zionists are punishing the entire world, for crimes of few who controlled the policies and funded the war including Rothschild family, to kill people and grab their resources? Are you going to reduce yourself to Zionists’ level that goes after a man in his late 80 because he was a guard in his twenties at the ‘camp?’ Are you going that low?

    You should look to see who is controlling the show to benefit and who is designing the policies and carries them out at the high level.
    It is important to recognize that Zionism has modified the behavior of Arab head of states from being oppose to partition of Palestine to petty stooges who do nothing but serve the interest of Zionism to survive.
    To control the world is their final goal. The ‘jewish’ aristocracy was controlling the British Empire and today is controlling American Empire. People who are carrying out the policies of the American Empire have made the choice to join the board, therefore, are guilty of war crimes and must be punished. You cannot deny it. Can’t you?

  139. b99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 1:17pm #

    Yes, Synic – the people of Palestine were overwhelmingly town dwellers or fellahin (farmers). Only a minority population was bedouin. It’s the bedouin who are more likely Arabian Peninsula in origin while urban and rural Palestinians have been in and around those towns and cities since cities were first invented ten thousand years ago.

  140. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 1:26pm #

    Shabnam

    Do hope you are not the voice of Arabs. You make them totally incapable of anything against the Zionists.

    You should see what the American empire has produced while you study up on the Rothschilds. Consider the infamous railroad barrons, the Mellon, Duponts, Gettys and Rockefellas, the Kennedys (relatively small potatoes), the Vanderbilts, Carnagie and on and on.
    Not one a Jew. Until recently this was clearly a WASP run nation.

    Now we look back when barely before AIPAC before, the existence of Israel before the Nazi uprise in Germany and claim that this was all done by a tiny Jewish clique.

    This is not simply ignornance of the facts, but an utter disrespect for power. And this disrespect is why what you say on behalf of Palestinians sound hollow and weak.

  141. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 2:03pm #

    Max:
    You have tendency to twist the facts. I wrote ‘Arab head of states’ not Arab people. The reason Palestinians are still struggling and are not going to go anywhere is due to Palestinians’ determination and sacrifice against colonialism. The elite, whether under Arab, American, British or Ottoman rule always have cooperated with the dominant power to remain as ‘elite’ All these rich people you have posted here have to cooperate with people in control of the world to benefit because they are part of Rothschilds and associates. Persians were instrumental in expansion of Islamic culture and its influence since Mohammad and few around him were not familiar with running an empire. Empire building is a serious business and requires people with skills. Persians were unique to provide such a skill to build the empire yet it is called Islamic civilization. We should not forget that Persian were Zoroastrian not Muslim.

    Nathan who said: I control the British Empire was NOT JOKING. Rothschields and its associates can NOT BE ONLY ‘jewish.’ To run an empire and maintain the control over it, you need the cooperation of elite in different parts of the world whose interests are the same.

  142. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 2:56pm #

    Re: Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 1:05pm #

    Max,

    I thought when you said that M.E is mainly nomadic that you were misled by zionist propaganda that claimed that Palestine was mostly desert and the zionist settlers made it bloom.
    Now I understand what you wanted really to say and please don’t blame me for misunderstanding you. Your were not clear on what really you want to say.

  143. Synic3 said on August 24th, 2009 at 3:18pm #

    Shabnam,

    With all due respect , you display a lot of confusion about understanding the history and forces that affected the creation of Israel and is affecting current world politics.
    You let the Brittish Empire off the hook very easily and blame everything on Rhotchield. That is pure ignorance of the facts.
    Yes, Rhotchield was powerful influential figure but he did not shape
    the policies of the Empire. You give him more power than he or his ilk had and have and contribut to the creation of a myth.

    The strife and division the Brittish left in the M.E. , they have repeated all over the world. The division of India and the Kashmir problem. The deliberate division of Africa to waring entities.
    Even they created the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and started this
    religious fundumentalist movement in the M.E. etc etc.
    You should try to understand history more.

  144. B99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 4:00pm #

    Shabnam – My position is not misleading at all. I’ve been very clear all along. I believe the only thing in the offing is the 2-state solution. That’s what Palestinian leadership has been pursuing for decades now. I have no right as an academic or activist or writer to demand more of the Palestinians than those on the ground. Do you think you can do so?

    I support a state for the Kurds, and have done so all along. For the same reason I support a state for the Palestinians. And certainly I believe it should include a piece of Turkey, where the Turks have oppressed Kurds now for decades. That apparently is not in the cards just now – but that does not deny me pleasure in seeing a Kurdistan emerge. They could use a seashore though!

    I have said little on Sudan genocide. I believe a certain segment of Darfurians are being killed by the state of Sudan or by people operating with a nod from the state. I also think the genocide is being manipulated by supporters of Israel because it is Arabs doing the killing. That’s criminal in and of itself – but my first allegiance is to the people of Darfur. They have a right to justice – and a right to live in peace. (And that’s without getting into the ecological considerations that bear heavily on why there is mass death in Darfur.)

    So have I cleared up my positions for you, Shabnam?

    So what is this talk of punishing the British? It’s too late now to punish the British – they’ve done their damage everywhere – but now they are an also-ran. Someone should slap Blair silly maybe, and certainly British Middle East policy is in bad need of change, but that’s about it. Maybe the Brits are being punished by having too many fundamentalist Muslims in their country. What goes around, comes around.

    I am not really concerned about some guard in his 80s. If he is unjustly punished that is unfortunate, but his fate is not my primary concern.

    Yes, Zionism is powerful. But that does not reduce other actors to zero – including the US, Britain and Arab heads of state. They have all had their interests in meshing with the Zionists where they do so. I, for one, have been the guy who said that Faisal contributed little or nothing to the Palestinian cause – you argued against me – now you call his kind stooges of Zionism. Which is it?

    It sounds like paranoia to say that the Zionist goal is to control the world. That is not even possible, and despite what Zionists brag – they don’t control the world – and never have. Their influence over the course of events is outsized and disproportionate to their numbers. But to say they control the world is a gross exaggeration. And yes, those who commit crimes should be punished. But what court will try them? Netanyahu is going to Europe. Do you think he will be arrested?

  145. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 4:44pm #

    Synic3 “Your were not clear on what really you want to say.”

    Frequently in the name of time and limits to these posts, clarification is in order. So, I thank you for making your point so I could then clarify what I meant.

  146. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 4:57pm #

    Synic3:

    Please read the following post before revealing yourself further.

    http://www.rense.com/general75/wrus.htm

  147. Max Shields said on August 24th, 2009 at 5:02pm #

    B99 there you go with the two state and with how Palestinian leaders support it. So, Hamas supports your two state solution? And what happens when polls are taken with a right of return for Palestinians?

    They overwhelmingly want a single sustainable state.

    The Darfur stuff is more liberal jibberjabber. Why do you care about he people of Darfur? Why not the people of the Congo or the people of New Orleans, or Somolia or Afghanistan or??? …the list can go on.

    This talk of Darfur is straight out of some notion of neoliberalism. Why not concern about what’s just happened in Honduras?

    My point is Darfur is the poster child of the neoliberals and Israeli right-wing for interventionism.

    What is it you’d like to see happen in Darfur?

  148. Shabnam said on August 24th, 2009 at 5:33pm #

    {This talk of Darfur is straight out of some notion of neoliberalism. Why not concern about what’s just happened in Honduras?}

    The zionists pro Israel are after Sudan as well like Iraq and Iran. They spread lies and deception through ‘Save Darfur’ to form public opinion against Sudan. Israel supports the opposition groups and gives them military training and financial support to destabilize and partition Sudan, the same way they partition Iraq to create an ally to be used against neighboring countries.

    You should ask Zmag and CPD this question:
    Why not concern about what’s just happened in Honduras?}

    http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/the-darfur-deception/

  149. B99 said on August 24th, 2009 at 8:15pm #

    Max – Yes, Hamas supports the two-state solution. What do you think the Hudna is besides a way to save face? They have made it clear that if Israel returns to Israel, the truce will extended indefinitely. Israel knows this – and can’t have it – so it attacked Gaza and pretended it was about rockets.

    The Palestinian people know the positions of both Fatah and Hamas – and they vote accordingly. In either case, they vote for the two-state solution – something Palestinians have supported for decades. Doesn’t mean they don’t want to reclaim the rest of Palestine some day. Sometimes you take what you can get – that’s what the Jews did.

    Who says I don’t care about the people of the Congo or New Orleans? I, In fact, am involved with a study of social vulnerability to natural catastrophe in that city even as we write here. My position is the same on New Orleans and the Congo as it is on Palestine, Kurdistan and Darfur – its a question of justice. And so you say that Darfur is the poster child for neoliberals and the Israeli right wing? Yeah, so what – did I not say almost precisely that in my post?

  150. United-Socialist-Front said on August 25th, 2009 at 8:14am #

    dan e: Yeah i don’t know why a large sector of people in America are so like emotionally attached to certain doctrines and theories. I mean i love socialism as a solution for USA. However if i learn that socialism is evil and it’s just an ideology which would benefit a top oligarchic class i would hate it. But americans know that capitalism is really evil and it only benefits a top upper class. And we have proofs of that because there has been no capitalism free market economy that could put bread and wealth on the table for all members of a nation.

    In all nations where capitalism has been tried it has only enriched an upper-class. But even though american people and “thinkers” know this they still embrace romantically a vertion of “humanized” capitalism. These folks are: Ron Paul, Pat Buchannan, and the ultra-right wing, libertarian conspiracy theory alternative news readers and fans of Alex Jones, Michael Rivero, Jeff Rense, etc. Who say deep truths about the corruptions and devilish things of US government but at the same time they fail at embracing and supporting the free market system, which is an evil and oligarchical system.

    .

  151. United-Socialist-Front said on August 25th, 2009 at 9:12am #

    Deadbeat: You know something, the media can turn any lowlife shitty into a God. I think that Ron Paul is not smart at all. Not intellectually-independent at all. Ron Paul is not smart, he is just brainwashed and mind-controlled. If he was smart he would quit being a capitalist and embrace socialism ideology.

  152. Max Shields said on August 25th, 2009 at 11:23am #

    B99,

    I think you are mis-representing the Hamas’ intent:

    “Hamas supports the united Palestinian position calling for the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, including Jerusalem, and the right of return for refugees, Hamas politburo chief Khaled Meshal told the Palestinian daily Al-Ayam.”

    Khaled Mashaal has said as recently as May this year that a full Palestinian sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital, and right of return of any and all Palestinians.

    While this may sound like a two state it is physically impossible to have these in a two-state. Only a one state can be sustained given the land mass. How do you split the baby if Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine? How to you offer full right of return and have a Jewish/Israeli state.

    It is claer that Palestinians are willing to live with Jews, but not under the conditions of a Jewish state as a “neighbor” on lands that Palestinians will not forgo. But what is more, no state, as described by Mashaal can exist as separate. Everyone knows that. It is a little delusional game to keep kicking the can…but only some, apparently, you B99, fail to see the inevitability…

    As I’ve said, nature (including oil) will solve this one.

  153. b99 said on August 25th, 2009 at 12:07pm #

    No, no, no Max – I’m not misrepresenting Hamas at all. The three principal reasons that Hamas sometimes says things like what you quote is that it is for internal consumption, or that not all of Hamas always speaks on one voice, or because they are sometimes tired of being treated like pussies by Israel – who bombs them even as Hamas cooperates in every regard.

    Hamas accepted an Israel within currently accepted borders no later than 1993. And Hamas publicly accepts the Saudi Peace Proposal of 2002. Abu Shanad of Hamas even said that Palestine would like to live in a ‘good neighborhood with Israel.’ So the Israelis assassinated him for his generosity. Ismael Haniya said in 2006, “If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, peace will prevail and we will implement a hudna for many years.”

    18 June 2007 – Haniya said: “We want the creation of a Palestinian state ON the 1967 borders, that is Gaza and the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The PLO is in charge of negotiations on this point. We have agreed to respect ALLthe past agreements signed by the PA.” (capital letter emphasis mine)

    I can give many, many other examples. Right now Hamas is between a rock and a hard place. They have accepted the existence of Israel within ’67 borders, but have gotten nothing for it in return. (As neither did Fatah earlier.) The question is can they stick to this position against the possibility that nothing will come of it and some Palestinians may then once again clamor for a Palestine in all of the country. Hamas may have to change its position – which is what Israel very much wants. The Israelis hate Palestinian moderation. They’ve been arresting and killing moderates since 1967.

  154. b99 said on August 25th, 2009 at 12:12pm #

    Regarding nature and oil, I try to discuss Palestine’s Israel problem as if nature does not exist – and discuss nature as if Palestine’s problem does not exist. That’s partly because discussion of Palestinian justice cannot be contingent upon a healthy planet and partly because the specifics of what is going to happen and where in our earthly environment are not yet ascertainable.

  155. Max Shields said on August 25th, 2009 at 12:45pm #

    B99 then you are saying Hamas is lying to their people? Think they are idiots who need to be treated with kidgloves?

    Hamas knows (and it takes little to see this) that all talk of a two-state solution is just that…THAT is the public consumption that is going on here and there.

    Where, B99 does Hamas claim to accept Israel and it’s borders? I’ve stated above which is probably what you’re referring to – pre-67 war. But that includes right of return and Jerusalem. If that’s “internal consumption” than that is what the Palestinians want….no? You can’t have it both ways just to shoe horn your version of Palestine and justice into a neat little package. Life doesn’t operate that way.

    Palestinian “justice cannot be dependent upon a healthy planet.” ????

    So environmental justice is not part of the justice you want for the Palestinians? You want even more to die from starvation and thirst for what justice? What justice is this that is separate from another justice? This makes absolutely no sense. Of course you realize this, right?

  156. b99 said on August 25th, 2009 at 1:28pm #

    Hamas is not lying to its people. Palestinans know their position. They elected Hamas on issues having to do with corruption, provision of civil services, AND the hope they will stand up to Israel -things Fatah has failed at. I know you hate to hear that because it doesn’t fit your schema, but that’s the way it goes.

    On the issue of Hamas accepting the 2002 Arab League peace offer – right there you have lost your case. There’s little clearer than this offer for full recognition behind ’67 borders and negotiation of right of return of refugees. Hamas signed on. Israel knows that. Palestinians know that. Max does NOT know that.

    Sometimes, Max – you are a lying sack of shit and a number of people on this site call you on it. You know I said “DISCUSSION OF Palestinian justice cannot be contingent upon a healthy planet.” Yet you dropped that part of the quote.

    And don’t think that because you inserted the words ‘nature and oil’ into a closing sentence that means you discussed environmental justice and Palestine. That does not cover your ass. It is YOU who fail to see or discuss the nuances of what justice in Palestine means but instead dismiss the entire issue with “nature will solve this one. ” Is that right? Is that your intellectual shrug? Can you manage not to step in bucket of shit for once?

  157. B99 said on August 25th, 2009 at 2:17pm #

    This from Arab Media Watch.

    ‘Abd al-Aziz Rantisi, the Hamas spokesman in Gaza and arguably the key political leader in the organisation before his assassination, said in an interview in January 1998: “We have announced our readiness for a truce in which there would be a withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza in return for a ceasefire.”
    The late senior Hamas leader Ismail Abu Shanab (former deputy to Yassin, Hamas’s observer to the PLO and its representative to the National and Islamic Forces, the coordination body for the intifada) went furthest in seemingly accepting a peace settlement based on a return to the 1967 borders.
    In 1997, he said in an interview: “If US President Bill Clinton said this conflict should be solved by dividing the land, he could succeed. Although it is not fair, most Palestinians will accept it.”
    In April 2002, he declared, on behalf of Hamas, his acceptance of the Saudi-initiated Arab peace proposal, which called for full recognition of Israel in return for a full Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab land. He said Hamas will “cease all military activities” if Israel withdrew to its 1967 borders, and spoke of his desire to have a “good neighborhood with Israelis.” Israel rejected the proposal, and Abu Shanab was assassinated months later.
    Hamas has often offered ceasefires or an end to suicide bombings on the condition of the end of the occupation. In one recent example from July 2002, a day before a scheduled Hamas re-publicisation of this offer, Israel assassinated one of its founding members – a move that has been credited to Israeli attempts to forestall Hamas’s moves to a ceasefire, and thus preserve the state of war that allows it to justify the perpetuation of the occupation. Since then, Israel has assassinated several key Hamas figures, including Yassin in his wheelchair.
    Hamas leaders have opposed according legitimacy to Israel prior to a stated Israeli intention to withdraw from the occupied territories. This may seem unwise to some, good tactics to others. However, for the media to portray a Palestinian faction that has gained widespread support in the occupied territories, particularly since its strong election triumph in January 2006, as unwilling to compromise with Israel, would be to invite an unwillingness on Israel’s part to compromise with the Palestinians.
    One Hamas leader has posed the apt question: “Is Palestine destroying Israel, or is Israel destroying Palestine?”
    Official statements

    Since their rise to power, Hamas officials have made the following statements, according to newswires:
    23 May 2006 – Ismail Haniya told Israel’s Ha’Aretz newspaper that the Islamist movement would institute a long-term ceasefire, or hudna, if Israel pulled out of the whole of the West Bank and east Jerusalem, captured in the 1967 Middle East war.
    “If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, peace will prevail and we will implement a hudna for many years,” Haniya said during an interview in Gaza.

    “Our government is prepared to maintain a long-term ceasefire with Israel.”

    12 May 2006 – In a speech to commemorate the 58th anniversary of the Palestinian nakbah – when over 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homeland – Ismail Haniya said:
    “The government will not make concessions on the principles and rights of the Palestinians, but that does not mean we are calling for war or that we want disorder in the region … If Israel recognises a Palestinian state, accepts the right of return of refugees and the release of prisoners, that will be our position [i.e. they would recognise Israel]”.

    26 April 2006 – A statement posted on Hamas’s website said it was willing to end the Middle East conflict. Deputy Prime Minister Nasseridin al-Shaer was quoted as saying:

    “We are not afraid to pay a political price for it [peace], but this must be done in coordination collectively with all Arab countries and on a legal basis.”

    25 April 2006 – Prime Minister Ismail Haniya condemned the triple bombings in Dahab, Egypt:

    “We condemn this odious crime which has taken place in Dahab and which undermines the national security of Egypt … We stand by Egypt and in solidarity with the Egyptian people.”

    21 April 2006 – Hamas leader Khaled Meshal said in an interview with the German TV channel ZDF:

    “Israel must withdraw from territories occupied since 1967. This includes the capital of Jerusalem.”

    Other conditions include “the right of refugees to return as well as the dismantlement of Jewish settlements, the destruction of the separation barrier and the release of all [Palestinian] detainees … If and only if Israel does this, then Hamas, Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims will be ready for true peace.”

    In effect, Hamas is only asking for Israel to comply with international law before it will recognise it, a reasonable proposition.

    20 April 2006 – The Hamas-led government welcomed comments made by French President Jacques Chirac in support of continuing foreign aid to the Palestinians. Hamas spokesman Ghazi Hamad told AFP:

    “We believe this is a good position that reflects a positive trend … We hope this vision will translate into a change in Europe’s position of cutting aid to the Palestinian people and political relations with the government … We appreciate this position from France, which has always had positive relations with regard to the Palestinian cause.”

    19 April 2006 – Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya spoke to Romano Prodi to congratulate him on winning the Italian elections. He told Prodi that Hamas was committed “to calm and stability in the region and the implementation of a just peace which would put an end to the Israeli occupation and restore the Palestinian people’s rights.”

    18 April 2006 – Prime Minister Ismail Haniya told reporters: “Peace and security in the region will flow from the end of the occupation and the recovery of all our rights.”

    11 April 2006 – In response to an EU decision to suspend aid payments to the Palestinian people, Ismail Haniyeh said:

    “We can see that this decision as a green light for Israel to continue its aggressions and as a collective punishment on the Palestinian people over its democratic choice … The Palestinian government reiterates its commitment to the rights and principles of the Palestinian people. We will show our ability to stand up to these efforts to isolate the Palestinian people, both regionally and internationally.”

    7 April 2006 – According to Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, Hamas has offered Israel an unofficial truce as long as it is reciprocated.

    5 April 2006 – Prime Minister Ismail Haniya authorised government ministers to have contact with Israel in order to ease Palestinian daily life:

    “Nothing stops ministers from having contacts with the Israelis to deal with matters connected to daily life, business and the economy …

    “When it comes to political negotiations, that poses a problem because they subscribe to a political vision. We are waiting on what is proposed to us, we will study it and decide on our position …

    “What is important is that the next Israeli government takes courageous decisions about issues which concern the rights of our people and not imposed unilateral measures …”

    4 April 2006 – According to a letter from Foreign Minister Mahmud al-Zahar to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the new Hamas government said:

    “We look forward to living in peace and security, as all countries in the world, and that our people enjoy freedom and independence side-by-side with all our neighbours in this holy place …

    “Our government is serious about working with the quartet …

    “Our government is ready for serious discussions and to work with the United Nations and with the entire international community to strengthen security, sovereignty, peace and independence in our region based on just resolutions.”

    31 March 2006 – In an interview in the Guardian, Prime Minister Ismail Haniya wrote:

    “We in Hamas are ready for peace and want to put an end to bloodshed. We have been observing a unilateral truce for more than a year without reciprocity from the Israeli side …

    “The message from Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to the world powers is this: talk to us no more about recognising Israel’s ‘right to exist’ or ending resistance until you obtain a commitment from the Israelis to withdraw from our land and recognise our rights …

    “Though we are the victims, we offer our hands in peace, but only a peace that is based on justice …”

    18 June 2007 – Haniya said: “We want the creation of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, that is Gaza and the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The PLO is in charge of negotiations on this point. We have agreed to respect all the past agreements signed by the PA.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2105236,00.html

    The question of recognition

    It is well known that Hamas has refused to recognise Israel’s right to exist. This, however, does not mean that Hamas does not recognise that Israel exists. Hamas is only questioning its right to exist because Israel was created on Palestinian land cleansed of its indigenous population. It is therefore illogical to expect the Palestinians to recognise that this is “right,” or that Israel had a “right” to do this. As renwoened Argentinean-Israeli conductor Daniel Barenboim told the Austrian weekly magazine Profil:

    “We must recognise that the creation of Israel entailed the expulsion of Palestinians. So we cannot ask the Palestinians to accept Israel’s right to exist. (But) we can ask them to recognise that Israel does exist.”

    The PLO’s recognition of Israel’s “right to exist in peace and security” in 1993 is widely seen by Palestinians as a catastrophic blunder, because Israel never reciprocated by recognising that the Palestinians have a right to exist or form a state of their own.

    Were Israel to withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories, allow the Palestinians to create their own viable, sovereign, independent state, and allow refugees the option of choosing whether to return, all in line with international law, then Hamas could, in principle, recognise Israel.

    As it stands, Israel is doing all it can on the ground, through its occupation, settlement activity and barrier construction, to deny the possibility of a viable, sovereign, independent Palestinian state. It thus cannot be said that Israel has accepted Palestine’s right to exist. Surely recognition should be mutual.

  158. Max Shields said on August 25th, 2009 at 7:22pm #

    B99

    You are so twisted in your presentation here you don’t even know what you last said…it’s utter bull shit.

    This is what you said:
    “That’s partly because discussion of Palestinian justice cannot be contingent upon a healthy planet and partly because the specifics of what is going to happen and where in our earthly environment are not yet ascertainable.”

    My remark addressed this sentence – YOUR sentence. “discussion of Palestinian justice cannot be contingent upon a healthy planet…”

    Do you even know what your saying, B99 or do you think we don’t remember you last post as you keep endlessly marching on? The issue of Palestinian “justice” is not dependent upon ecological justice. Again, as if one can separate one justice from another…even if you simply look exclusively at the region…(forgetting the entire planet) you have an unsustainable situation. The Palestinians are living in an unjust environmental condition…it is NOT separate from some “other” justice.

    To finish your point: “and partly because the specifics of what is going to happen and where in our earthly environment are not yet ascertainable.”

    What the fuck does that even mean? It seems you are trying to say we don’t know enough about the environment, things like climate change and oil depletion (get a hold of some geologists studies) to say that the region, at least what we call collectively Gaza, West Bank and Israel is “not yet ascertainable”.

    This is a known geography, dumb ass, with an understanding of basic sustanence requirements, population growth projection, you can pretty well tell what the area can handle (ascertain).

    If you don’t get that maybe you just can’t. But the point is endless growth of humans in a small region with limited water supply, and with Israel a pure creation of Western technology and industry based almost exclusively on oil…what do you think is being created?

    You, maybe can’t “ascertain” dip shit, but some folks can, and they’re running the show. Got it?

  159. B99 said on August 25th, 2009 at 8:22pm #

    Max – You are just talking crap now – as you always do. You have not the foggiest idea of the ecology of Palestine – in fact, you have not the foggiest idea of the subject of Palestine at all. All you know is you want to fit it into some asinine bioregion and you want the Jews and Arabs to live there peaceably because it fits your pre-conceived naive notion of what justice is about. What you do know is that your color is slime green and you want to hurl it every chance you get. When you know the first thing about the region, we can discuss it. In the meantime you can explain to everyone how there really is no capitalist economy – there is only industrialism – something left greens understood and dismissed back in the nineties, back before the Green Party slipped into a-holedom by letting in bourgeois buttholes like you.

    You want to talk the Geography of Palestine? You don’t know shit about the geography of Palestine. I am a geographer by trade, we can discuss the spatial distribution of Hyracoidea in Palestine, the substrata of the Taninim Aquifer, the effect of the anti-Lebanon mountains on precipitation in Syria, the integration of the Cochin Jews into Israeli society, relations between bedouins and Palestinian town dwellers, between German-descended Ashkenazi and Polish-descended Ashkenazi, and the salination of swamps in Gaza via Mediterranean seepage due to Israeli overpumping. What the eff can you talk about other than the idiot notion that Palestinians MUST want all their country back because Max wants that for them. In five minutes I can type out a more cogent response to zionist pseudo-history than all the knowledge you’d gain if you studied the next twenty years. So why don’t you move on to something you are familiar with and stop flaming anyone and everyone on subjects you are clueless about.

  160. Max Shields said on August 25th, 2009 at 8:39pm #

    You are a PHd of NOTHING…by trade or by imagination.

    You, B99 are a king-sized bull shitter. “A bull shitter” is someone who has more to say about less and less.

  161. Annie Ladysmith said on August 26th, 2009 at 1:22am #

    Listen to yourselves, you are the terrorists, you are the thugs, you are the weapons of mass destruction!

    Sal, asshole, just keep blowing it out your ass it’s all you’ve got baby.

    US/CF you should loose some of that fat-ass your carting around, i know fat-cows are bitter but you’ve taken it to a new level.
    And i thank you all for your gall and low-born comments, you are a bunch of little tyrants that make Saddam positively likable.

    Stupid people, don’t you realize that death is coming for you too?

  162. Deadbeat said on August 26th, 2009 at 4:24am #

    U-S-F writes …
    Deadbeat: You know something, the media can turn any lowlife shitty into a God. I think that Ron Paul is not smart at all. Not intellectually-independent at all. Ron Paul is not smart, he is just brainwashed and mind-controlled. If he was smart he would quit being a capitalist and embrace socialism ideology.

    You are right about the media. The media labeled Paul as a “fringe” candidate because he was not perceived as being part of the “mainstream”. However Paul is all over the media now because of his defense of Capitalism. It amazes me that some members of the “Left” supported his 2008 campaign but then again it reflects the utter discombobulation of the “Left”. IMO it is this disconcert that is IMO the real threat because it creates the vacuum being filled by the Ron Paul and Barack Obamas.

  163. Deadbeat said on August 26th, 2009 at 4:32am #

    In the meantime [Max Shields] you can explain to everyone how there really is no capitalist economy – there is only industrialism – something left greens understood and dismissed back in the nineties, back before the Green Party slipped into a-holedom by letting in bourgeois buttholes like you.

    ROTFLMAO. It seem like B99 got your number Max. HAHAHAHAAHAHA!

    DB

  164. bozh said on August 26th, 2009 at 6:45am #

    max, right!
    one cannot separate justice 1 from justice 2, justice 3, etc.
    Justice 1 symbolizes mutually accepted laws; justice 2 symbolizes agreement on ecological level; justice 3 symbolizes the right of palestinians to be in palestine, etc.

    As a wise person had said, To be is to be related! Thus, pal’ns are related to all of the expalestine and not just separated counties.

    there is no mutually accepeted laws in israel. There are pal’ns in israel. And if US wld allow return, palestine wld be at least half pal’n.
    Projecting fears ab. pal’ns, a shemo-hamitic people with cult 1, and another shemo-canaanitic people with cult 2 living together, appears as a conclusion or even wishful thinking on the part of an illwisher.
    In addition, many shemites and even ashk’m are secular and not cultish.
    It is fiercely cultish people who don’t get along with anyone.

    Ashk’m in canada live in separate enclaves and get along with the rest of us; i.e., don’t impose their justice 4 on our justice 5. tnx

  165. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 7:18am #

    B(for bull shitter) 99,

    as to capitalism stick to the f*ken point. BSers, when they can’t argue facts toss out red herrings and deadbeats sop it up.

    You b (BS)99 don’t pass the smell test…you’re a genuine phony!

  166. b99 said on August 26th, 2009 at 9:50am #

    But Maxine – You have to admit you were clueless on Hamas. All that history available to you and you instead chose to insert your little square peg into your big round hole so you could be judged “Palestine’s Biggest Ally.” Oops!

  167. b99 said on August 26th, 2009 at 10:11am #

    No, Bozh. One can discuss the environment/ecology on most any issue. But for purposes of discussing say, the desecration of mosques and Muslim (or Christian) cemeteries in Israel – there’s no need to do so. You know, communists used to tell me that the new Palestine could be a stateless region – the world’s first. I would answer that we are not going to build a statless world on the backs of Palestinians. Similarly, we are not going to build bioregions on the backs of Palestinians – that’s up to them if and when they are ready. If someone wants to establish the Hudson River Bioregion as a politico-ecological entity then so be it. But let’s not transfer that bourgeois drivel to Palestine. I’ve written quite a bit on the need for water sharing in the Levant and Palestine and the ecological possibilities (and neccesity) of cooperation – connected at the hip to regional peace and justice for all. But there’s absolutely NO need for that to be discussed in all posts. Never mind throw away sentences about nature and oil resolving all issues.

  168. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 11:19am #

    “communists use to tell me…” more bs from b(bs)99.

    This guy is nothing but pure hot air.

    He’s now introducing the notion of a bioregion for Palestinians. Bioregions exist. They can be acknowledged or ignored, regardless of states – one or two. One does not impose a “bioregion” and the “Communists” you talk to weren’t talking bioregion and if they had some other dreams for Palestinians its totally irrelevant, just as your two-state solution is.

    Creating a state is an artifical means of enclosing and protecting one terrority from another. There is really no purpose in having countries other than to divvy up resources and build military defense barriers. Settlement clusters are understandable, and natural.

    But all that said there are two parts to this reality – geopolitical and ecological. One generally ignores the other. Geopolitically, the Zionists do not want to provide a sovereign sustainable piece of real estate next to them, particularly if that piece of real estate expects to have full fledged military – and given the nature of state-hood and the fact that the Zionists have no intention of eliminating their military forces, it’s highly unlikely that Palestinians would go for a state with no military next to the most preditory states of post-modern times.

    The ecological reality is that the region cannot sustain two such nation-states side by side; and this is exaserbated by the trajectory of population growth in the region, dependency on oil to keep what exists going, and a variety of climate related changes.

    But b(bs) 99 you refuse to acknowledge these realities and hold onto the mythology of a viable “two-state solutions”.

  169. bozh said on August 26th, 2009 at 12:16pm #

    b99,
    it seems to me that the symbol “bioregion” is not as clear as one cld say it in english: biota or life which wld include fish in water and seas, forest, game, etc., in a particular area.
    i do not know what, “We are not going to build a bioregion on backs of pal’ns” means?
    it appears to me that the management of biota, forests, agriculture, fish, waters wld be up to a region’s inhabitants.
    Ecological justice 6 wld be obtained by science and gov’ts/peoples where science would [i hope] trump a stronger military power’s unilateralism.

    In case of israel, we do not need any more evidence that israel and US solely decide what israel can do.
    And yes on the backs of pal’ns. US and israel solely, aided by europe [or so it seems to me], mete out justice 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, k; and precisely beacause they all are interconnected and all lead to one strategic goal.
    And, whatever it be!
    in rereading ur piece, i note u say, “It’s up to pal’ns if and when they are ready”.

    however, one can prove that no action is up to pal’ns. Actually, it had been proven over and over again that pal’ns represent no brakeage in US/Israeli stampeding tanks, land theft, etc.
    even their armed resistance had not defended their lands; in fact they were and are now losing land.

    I gather that u want to reward stern, irgun, and haganahs crimes with a state of their own. U further, but perhaps only for israel, honor in eternity first conquest and israeli violation of an agreement with UN that pal’ns can come back to israel in exchange for israel’s admission to UN.
    But are scared to say so explicitly!?
    Methinks, u want counties for pal’ns and a phantom country for them, with no assurance that pal’sn wld not be expelled or receive equal rights with ‘jews’.
    tnx

  170. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 12:18pm #

    bozh,

    You get it!!

  171. Deadbeat said on August 26th, 2009 at 12:30pm #

    when they can’t argue facts toss out red herrings and deadbeats sop it up.

    The problem is Max when you “debate” you like to throw out ad hominum attacks and you NEVER address your own contradictions. What I’ve seen b99 say is that Hamas accepts a two-state solution. Now whether you agree with Hamas or not that there could be “viability” is another issue that can be discussed civilly. Unfortunately civility is your least trait. You have a tendency to DISTORT and take out of context your counterparty’s position that is intellectually dishonest. Apparently B99 has called you on your tactics as I have often done. I’m glad others are calling you out on your atrocious behavior.

    If you want to persuade people reading these debates to your position Max offer arguments and facts to support your position; be open-minded especially when you are called to clarify what apparently are contradictions to you position and especially STOP misrepresenting your counterparty’s position.

  172. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 12:45pm #

    Deadbeat, you don’t read what I say and than you blame me for your ineptness.

    The case I’ve made about Hamas was based on facts and presented here. That you choose to read my utter frustration with a phony/msm pseudo-intellectual is not my problem.

  173. United-Socialist-Front said on August 26th, 2009 at 12:59pm #

    Annie: My friend, don’t insult me, don’t take your anger against me. Take your anger against the destroyers of USA (The upper capitalist class and the capitalist system), I don’t like telling people what to do. But i am just suggesting you, into taking a look at the ideology of socialism as the next stage in human development.

    Here are 3 great pages with introduction material toward Marxism and Socialism. With a real 100% Workers-socialist system in America, the working class (Most Americans) will be participating in the wealth produced in this country. And workers-socialism will also elevate the living standards of most US citizens (US workers and their families), along with many other benefits, like more democracy, more individualist freedom, less crime, less wars in this world, etc:

    http://www.marxists.org

    http://www.socialistworker.org

    http://www.socialistaction.org

  174. United-Socialist-Front said on August 26th, 2009 at 1:00pm #

    Annie: My friend, don’t insult me, don’t take your anger against me. Take your anger against the destroyers of USA (The upper capitalist class and the capitalist system), I don’t like telling people what to do. But i am just suggesting you, into taking a look at the ideology of socialism as the next stage in human development.

    Here are 3 great pages with introduction material toward Marxism and Socialism. With a real 100% Workers-socialist system in America, the working class (Most Americans) will be participating in the wealth produced in this country. And workers-socialism will also elevate the living standards of most US citizens (US workers and their families), along with many other benefits, like more democracy, more individualist freedom, less crime, less wars in this world, etc:

    marxists.org

    socialistworker.org

    socialistaction.org

  175. United-Socialist-Front said on August 26th, 2009 at 1:02pm #

    THE PROBLEM WITH US PRESIDENTS IS NOT EVIL. BUSH, OBAMA, CLINTON ARE NOT EVIL, BUT LACK THE NECESSARY COURAGE AND STRENGTH TO CONFRONT THE POWERS THAT BE.

    i think that it is necessary for political leaders to be active-nihilists, tragic heroes, and to have the enough will to power, and strength of independence like Nietzsche talked about “Free spirits” to crush and destroy the racist values of this society in order to transcend toward a leftist paradigm like Rafael Correa is doing in Ecuador.

    So i think that one of the major problems of most political leaders in both the right and the left is that they don’t have the necessary strength of courage and will to power to confront the real government (Corporations and rich people). Even Bush. Bush was not really evil, but weak to confront the real rulers of USA, and that’s why he did all that he did (The illegal wars, 9-11, Patriot Act, torture, etc.)

    A superman doesn’t have any thing to do with political, military and abusive power, like the Nazis. Nazism and Fascism are elements of capitalism, of corporate exploitation, abuse, racism, chauvinism and evil, they twisted Nietzsches writtings (Specially Nietzsche’s sister who was a Nazi).

    But really, a great man, a Superman (Ubermensch) is this type of revolutionary, rebel, anarchist, totally free individual who has no laws, and authorities over him, he also doesn’t accept the morality and conservative laws of the current regimen, in fact he tries to influence others by breaking the old values in order to teach to other members of his society his new values. A superman would be a revolutionary reformer of new laws, new values.

    My friends, you can find out more about Nietzsche’s superman in the book “Thus Spoke Zarathustra” which even could be used in today’s United States, a country oppressed by 2 corporate capitalist parties (Democrats and Republicans) and where US citizens feel that there is literally no hope, no liberation out of this hell of our kleptocratic Democrat-Republican 1 party monster.

    The main thesis of Thus Spoke Zarathustra is the fact that humans have literally 2 options in this existance, either to accept the current reality and values and succumb to a state of passive-nihilist resignation, or to be an architect of our own destiny, inserted in this reality as a active-tragic nihilist (A destroyer of old values, and creators of new values)

    Here is a short review of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, one of Nietzsche’s best works about the superman. a review of “Thus Spoke Zarathustra” which is a manifesto to gain strength and courage. Which is what the US left needs to destroy the US right.

    http://www.geocities.com/thenietzschechannel/zara.htm

    Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra is probably his most famous work as well as being the work least popular among readers. This is probably partially because it is written in fictional form. Zarathustra is well designed to frustrate twentieth century conservative bourgeoise philosophy of the analytic tradition, which seeks conceptual clarity at the expense of rhetorical form, indeed often insisting on the separation between a concept and the vehicle of its expression. Moreover, the utilization of the work by the Nazi war effort did little to improve the books reception in the Anglo-American world.

    The book is philosophically interesting, in part because it does employ literary tropes and genres to philosophical effect. Zarathustra makes frequent use of parody, particularly of the Platonic dialogues and the New Testament. This strategy immediately places Zarathustra on a par with Socrates and Christ–and as a clear alternative to them. The erudite allusions to works spanning the Western philosophical and literary traditions also play a philosophical role, for they both reveal Nietzsche’s construct of the tradition he inherited and flag points at which he views it as problematic.

    Much of the book consists of Zarathustra’s speeches on philosophical themes. These often obscure the plotline of the book. The book does involve a plot, however, which includes sections in which Zarathustra is “off-stage,” in private reflection, and some in which he seems extremely distressed about the way his teaching and his life are going. Zarathustra attempts to instruct the crowds and the occasional higher independent man that he encounters in the book; but his most important teaching is his education of the reader, accomplished through demonstrative means. Zarathustra teaches by showing.

    Zarathustra stands in he tradition of the German Bildungsroman, in which a character’s development toward spiritual maturity is chronicled. Zarathustra can be seen as a paradigm for the modern, spiritually sensitive individual, one who grapples with nihilism, the contemporary crisis in values in the wake of the collapse of the Christian worldview that assigned humanity a clear place in the world.

    In the popular imagination, Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch is one of his most memorable and significant ideals. However, the concept of the Ubermensch is actually discussed little in the book. The topic is the theme of the first speech in “Zarathustra’s Prologue,” which he presents to a crowd gathered for a circus. The audience interprets Zarathustra as a circus barker and the speech as an introduction to a performance by a tightrope walker. The concept is mentioned recurrently in Part I as something of a refrain to Zarathustra’s speeches. But the word Ubermensch rarely occurs after that.

    Additionally, the notion of the Ubermensch is presented in more imagistic than explanatory terms. The Ubermensch, according to Zarathustra, is continually experimental, willing to risk all for the enhancement of humanity. The Ubermensch aspires to greatness, but Zarathustra does not formulate any more specific characterization of what constitutes the enhancement of humanity or greatness. He does, however, contrast the Ubermensch to the last man, the human type whose sole desire is personal comfort and happiness. Such a person is the “last man” quite literally, incapable of the desire that is required to create beyond oneself in any form, including that of having children.

    Zarathustra’s opening speech, besides proposing the Ubermensch as the ideal for humanity also places emphasis on this world as opposed to any future world. In particular, Zarathustra urges that human beings reassess the value of their own bodies, indeed their embodiment. For too long, dreaming of the afterlife, Western humanity has treated the body as a source of sin and error. Zarathustra, in contrast, insists that the body is the ground of all meaning and knowledge, and that health and strength should be recognized and sought as virtues which is related to Marxism and Feuerbarch’s slogan of “You are what you eat” (Remember how right-wingers despise reality, economics, and physiology)

    Another prominent theme in Zarathustra is its emphasis on the relative importance of will. In part, this emphasis follows Schopenhauer in claiming that will is more fundamental to human beings than knowledge. However, Nietzsche stresses the will’s attempt to enhance its power, whereas he views Schopenhauer as placing greater stress on the will’s efforts at self preservation. Nietzsche’s famous conception of will to power makes one of its few published appearances in Zarathustra.

    Much of the plot of Zarathustra concerns his efforts to formulate his idea of eternal recurrence. At times, the idea possesses him in the form of visions and dreams. At others, he seems reluctant to state it categorically or to accept its implications. During a particularly despairing moment, he shudders at the implication of his doctrine that “the rabble,” the bourgeoise people who comprise most of the human race, will also recur. The fact that Zarathustra objects to the recurrence of the rabble is indicative of Nietzsche’s preference of a system in which we would be architects of our own destiny. Consistently, Nietzsche and Zarathustra contend that human beings are not equal and clones. Nietzsche objects to the bourgeoise conservative movements of his era in favor of more participative, libertarian and democratic forms of social organization that would place economic-control in the hands of each individual, instead of a few corrupt corporate crooks and burocrats like representative bourgeoise democracies (our current system).

  176. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 1:07pm #

    “a phony/msm pseudo-intellectual is not my problem.” i.e.,B99

  177. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 1:27pm #

    The truth is once the veils of hypocrosy are down, neither Hamas nor Israel want a two state solution. And to boot the landscape cannot sustain a two-state solution.

    Why is this so hard to understand? In a dream-like world, one can imagine two nations nuzzled side by side, each with what they need, trading with one another and the world.

    But, let’s wake up to the reality. This is a false picture laid out with NO intent on anyone’s part to actually acheive it. It has no place in reality, but it makes for a good idylic picture we can pretend will one day happen. It won’t and it can’t.

    What is most likely is that over time a signal area will emerge, it will be based not much suffering for the inhabitants, but it will happen because there will be no real choice. Reality will have its comeupance as it inevitably does.

    It’s not about ideology. It’s about nature and what has gone into creating what exists there. But I’ve said this time and again. And instead of a cogent argument (which I would be happy to engage in) I get funny talk, laced in a kind of pseudo-professorial tone with absolutely nothing else…telling me he’s a geography..whoopy!!! so what does that have to do with addressing my point. Then we get communists talked to him about Palestinians having a stateless utopia one day…a double whoopy!!! again it has nothing to do with my point.

    Then we get so deep into this nonsense, that he starts calling by a “lying sack of shit” (he threw the first punch). It’s apparent he will not deal head on with facts. And I retaliate.

    And then Deadbeat comes in sounding high and mighty, hasn’t read but a few pieces of this and that….bull shit piled on top of bull shit.

  178. B99 said on August 26th, 2009 at 2:21pm #

    Maxine – You LOST the argument on Hamas position. Move on.

    Bozh – Bioregion is Green talk. Maxine knows what it is. He wants it for Palestine but does not realize that the region is made up of several bioregions. But that’s not surprising – he knows not the region at all.

  179. B99 said on August 26th, 2009 at 2:28pm #

    Maxine – A person who drops key words from a quote is committing an act of commission, not omission – i.e., that makes you a lying sack of shit.

    And Bozh – Your opinion seems to now indicate that you too, like Maxine, are speaking for the Palestinians – and that it does not matter to you where the duly elected representatives of the Palestinian people stand on the issue of Palestinian survival, you are going to recommend what’s best for them. Is that a fair statement of your position?

  180. bozh said on August 26th, 2009 at 3:37pm #

    b99,
    The only thing i ever asked the pal’ns, and expicitly, was to cease with armed resistance.
    It does matter to me what pal’ns want. And yrs ago [and once or twice also on DV] i have stated that they have the right to decide what to demand and what to be satisfied with what they eventually receive back, [not get]

    We know, pal’ns want equal rights with ‘jews’. I do not think that anyone needs to tell them that that’s a basic human right.
    As such, it takes little acumen to espy that it is not negotiable. But, of course, pal’ns have a right to negotiate over it!

    Two state solution is OK for me. It appears to be OK with pal’ns. It si OK with UN!
    Facts on the ground prove [not indicate, but prove] US and israel are not for a two state solution. They are for separated counties for pal’ns, or rather, that’s what there is and the hell with wishfulness or supplication.

    Mafioso org’s, such as israel and US [nearly all countries are ruled by gangsters] have never negotiated nor do they now. Gangsters always put dwn a diktat or agree knowingly that they won’t keep their word.
    And i am sure that i am not saying anything pal’ns and ‘jews’ don’t know. tanx

  181. Deadbeat said on August 26th, 2009 at 4:56pm #

    Deadbeat, you don’t read what I say and than you blame me for your ineptness.

    Again Max, I’m taking about your tone and practice of MISREPRESENING your counterparty’s position. Not to mention your own IGNORE your own contradictions.

    I’m not addressing the content of your discussion with B99 nor am I taking sides in your debate with him. Thus once again Max you’d rather shoot off with the insults and ad-hominems rather than stay on point.

  182. joed said on August 26th, 2009 at 5:51pm #

    DIVIDE AND CONQUOR
    IF YOU GET IN A PISSIN’ CONTEST WITH A SKUNK–YOU’RE GONNA’ LOSE.
    Just ignore the torture lovin’ amerikan pigs.

  183. Max Shields said on August 26th, 2009 at 6:46pm #

    Deadbeat – What contradictions?

    You see you and B(bs)99 have the same problem. You make wild ass comments and never reference what it is you’re talking about.

    B(bs)99 says I’m misrepresenting and not quoting completely. When and where? I went back to his statement regarding justice and tore it apart and still he makes these dumbass comments….

    He then goes on to talk about capitalism and industrialization completely out of context of anything I’ve said here or what this post is all about.

    And then B(bs)99 goes on about how bioregions is “Green Talk” whatever the hell that means and says I know…know what? What the word bioregion means? Yes it comes from sustainability. Bozh understands it. It’s not arcane, it has no insider meaning. It can be readily looked up on the internet…no hocus pocus. Just B(bs)99 tossing out yet another meaningless read herring.

    BIOREGION – Bioregionalism is a system which uses identifiable natural regions as the basis for self-managed political units. The demarcation of these bioregions takes into account climate, soils, drainage, vegetation, mineral resources and importantly the cultures and societies that occur in these regions. A bioregion is thus an identifiable unit that integrates the human systems with non human systems.

    Now apply to the Palestinians.

    Deadbeat, if only you would stop calling people names, calling them zionist chomskyites, and the like, maybe, just maybe you’d have a leg to stand on. Right now there’s no one with as much negative animous as you, DB.

  184. United-Socialist-Front said on August 26th, 2009 at 7:11pm #

    OPEN LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALSO VICTIM OF THE US EMPIRE. (In spanish)

    Carta al pueblo de los Estados Unidos, a ese pueblo que también es victima del imperio

    Por: Javier Monagas Maita
    Fecha de publicación: 26/08/09

    http://www.aporrea.org/internacionales/a85438.html

    Ciudadanos del mundo: hoy 25 /08/09. Siendo las 10:30 de la noche, en medio de mi inquietud, me dirijo a Uds. Dada su condición de electores de los gobiernos de su nación y fortaleza de opinión publica que debería velar por sus intereses de clases y la de los otros pueblos, ante la corresponsabilidad que eso implica tanto para el bienestar o malestar de Uds. y desgraciadamente del mundo. Ante la panorámica de desastre que se avizora en el planeta, que afectará a todos por igual, y que al parecer por la velocidad de los acontecimientos naturales, marcha hacia una catástrofe de inmensas consecuencias para la humanidad en general y para la propia madre naturaleza en específico, en un tiempo relativamente corto…

  185. b99 said on August 27th, 2009 at 6:48am #

    But Maxine – You do have to admit that you were dead wrong on Hamas, and thus you do have to admit you are too woefully ignorant on the Palestine issue to make public comment on same, and that you can’t possibly know how bioregionalism might apply to the greater region except by abstract definition.

    And of course, your mental invention of my having put the word bioregion in the mouths of communists is just that – or to put it another way – just more evidence that you are a lying sack of shit – and just this side of illiterate. Speaking of which, when you intentionally took the word ‘discussion’ out of “discussion of Palestinian justice cannot be contingent upon a healthy planet,” you once again revealed your disdain for truth and civility. In short, as a human – you suck.

  186. Max Shields said on August 27th, 2009 at 7:17am #

    B(bs)99 you can’t read. I never wrote that you wrote that communists touted bioregions. Your delusional!

    The word “discussion” doesn’t change the point one iota.

    I’m saying, Palestinian justice is not separate from the environmental circumstances of the specific region. One CANNOT separate and solve a human condition by keeping the “discussion” limited to one part of the condition. It is of a piece.

    You say you’re a geologist, but you never talk about what that means to the region, what the water and arable land capacity is vis a vis the human population and general needs, and the dependency of one part of that land area (Israel) on the high demand and consumption of oil and what the impact of that demand has on the overall ecological sustainability of the region. When you do write things there in the abstract and skirt the issue’s heart. (I can imagine from your previous posts, going on and on about geography and never touching on the issue of sustainability and carrying capacity of the region. That’s why I find what you say to be worthless because it provides a phony cover for meaninglessness.)

    The health and well-being of the Palestinian people is as much an ecological problem as it is a political or economic one, in fact neither polity nor economy exist without a sustainable environment.

    If you can’t “discuss” Palestinian justice as a whole than your sense of justice seems severly lacking.

    But, B(bs)99 when all is said and done most of what you post is really hot air (occasionally you hit on something that seems of value). Pretentious wind bagging doesn’t make your statement logical or true, just pompous.

  187. Max Shields said on August 27th, 2009 at 7:18am #

    Correction: geographer not geologist.

  188. b99 said on August 27th, 2009 at 12:18pm #

    Maxine – The right to self-determination for Palestinians (or anyone else) is NOT contingent on the ecology of the region. It is a political right – and as such, can be discussed ENTIRELY on its own merits.

    If you want to talk about any and all ecological considerations from quality and quantity of regional water supplies, the political history and geography (and geology!) of water in the region – and beyond – the ecological damage of the Apartheid Wall, the wastefulness of Israeli citri-culture, the emptying of the Dead Sea and possible solutions, Jordanian wastewater retrieval programs, the Libyan ‘Great Man-made River’, The Southeast Anatolia Project, siltation behind the Aswan Dam…whatever, I’m fully prepared to do so without further research. The battle on this site however, is against the Zionists.

    Regarding the communists, there’s no reason they can’t be discussed just because YOU didn’t bring it up. What are you, the gatekeeper on discussion? The analogy holds. You have NO solution to the problem and neither did the communists who suggested a stateless society. When I asked you several times how are you going to force them to live together you had no answer – and that’s because you know squat about the issue. You talk in terms of the larger ecology as if THAT would enable Jews and Arabs to live together. Hey, they don’t need one state to work out regional agreements on either the environment or economy. So just like the communists, your (non)answer is worthless.

    As far as schooling goes – you called me a PhD. I’m fine with that – that just means I’ve done the peer-reviewed original research. All you have is naive opinion based on asshole notions that you cannot substantiate. You need to go back to the drawing board kid – and on some other subject. And as we learned earlier, not Green Party history either.

  189. Max Shields said on August 27th, 2009 at 2:00pm #

    B(bs)99,

    “The battle on this site however, is against the Zionists.”

    Yes, and the point has been made, Petras and his followers think “Big Oil” had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq and that was Jews and Zionists who instigated the invasion and occupation.

    It’s a bogus argument since no case is made for “Big Oil”. So, that’s hardly a reason for endless posting.

    What has transpired, here, is your interjection of a “two-state solution”. Had you not gone there, this discussion, such as it is, between us, would never have materialized.

    In other words, B(bs)99 you started this digression. I merely called you on it and the rest is history…

    You don’t catch my cynicism and sometimes humor which complicates this diversion. For instance, referencing you as a Ph.D. is simply away of saying WHO CARES!

    But you are predictable. Your response to the ecological state of Gaza/Israel/West Bank…you went on pontificating as if that’s got this far in life so you keep doing the bull shit act.

    Green Party history – now there’s a pertinent point if ever one was made (get it..BS?).

  190. B99 said on August 27th, 2009 at 4:26pm #

    Maxine – You called me on it? ‘Fraid not asshole. My first post said that US interests were LARGER than Israel. Israel was already the subject of many, maybe most posts to this article. I at some point referred to the two-state solution – and that’s when you, in your usual harikari fashion, said Hamas wants one state. Then you got taken to the cleaners by me. The rest is not so much history (you wish it was), but your drivel.

    So, butthole, by ‘site’ I’m not talking about this thread, this discussion, I’m talking about DV – where Zionists post all the time.

    If saying PhD means ‘who cares’ – you need a stint in humor camp. But if you ‘don’t care,’ just move on – it’s not like you have anything to contribute to a discussion of Palestine. Maybe you should read about the history of the Green Party – they were, after all, around in the 80s and 90s – before they opened up to dorks.

  191. bozh said on August 27th, 2009 at 4:56pm #

    b99,
    There is THE palestinan de jure state. But thieves who stole ab. 12% of the jure state are too strong to attack. They are also unwilling to recognize pal’n state. And short of a nuclear threat on US or israel, US/Isr will never allow a second state.
    Yes, this is a ‘prediction’, but based naked facts.
    Thus, talking about pal’n right to a state that comprises 22% or their original homeland, appears in toto irrelevant.

    And what ‘jews’ do or have done meanwhile around or directly to the de jure palestinian state is connected much to that state.
    Using its waters, drilling tunnels, erecting walls, plowing under orchards, destroying homes, bringing an aliens on pal’n soil matter; i.e., the state may have been changed so as to not function as well as if it existed prior to ’67.
    tnx

  192. United-Socialist-Front said on August 27th, 2009 at 7:06pm #

    US IMPERIALISM HAS NEVER WON A WAR IN THIS WORLD
    (Article in spanish)

    Los Estados Unidos nunca han ganado una guerra de tú a tú. El arma más efectiva de los del Norte no es su poderío aéreo, naval, terrestre y nuclear, es su poderío mediático que hace que nuestra juventud odie lo propio y adore todo lo anglo. Ese poderío mediático es el que ha vendido la especie de un fuerza militar invencible y procuradora de libertad a los oprimidos. ¡nada más falso! porque ni es invencible, ni a llevado libertad a nadie, sino ocupación. Solo basta ver la condición humillante de Europa sesenta y cuatro años después del final de la segunda guerra mundial…

  193. Deadbeat said on August 27th, 2009 at 7:18pm #

    Max Sheilds writes…

    Yes, and the point has been made, Petras and his followers think “Big Oil” had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq and that was Jews and Zionists who instigated the invasion and occupation.

    Once again Max you are misrepresenting your counterparty’s position. It is the Chomskyite Left that has spent the better part of the last 30 years promoting the idea that “Big Oil” is behind U.S. Middle East policy making. They have deliberately downplayed and deflecting the role and influence of Zionism in U.S. policy making.

    In fact Max in your initial appearance on DV your strawman premise was how could “little tiny” Israel run “big bad” U.S. foreign policy when in fact NO ONE was making such a claim. Once again MAX your tactic is to MISSTATE and to DISTORT your counterparty’s position and base your arguments on that DISTORTION.

    The Petra’s position is to COUNTER to ACCEPTED and CONVENTION “DRUMBEAT” promoted by Chomsky “Left” and his followers that ignore Zionism’s influence (can you say Project of a New American Century and its drafters who were pervasive throughout the Bush Administration) and their insistence that Big Oil was if the only influencer but the PRIMARY influencer.

    The Petra’s position is much more dialectical and fully examines ALL interest parties and places their influence in context. Petras doesn’t try to hide, distort, ignore, deflect and mislead his audience as Chomsky does.

    This leads to asking a serious question why does Chomsky and his ilk are so hell-bent on misleading their audience. Why is it important for Mr. Chomsky and his ilk to cover-up and even to defend a racist ideology? It raise serious question about the veracity of their so-called “activism” and their seriousness of any future alignment with such promoters.

    What happens is not only are activist being mislead but it essentially retards solidarity because these question indication not only a major contradiction in their stance but a chilling realization they any configuration with such folks leads to betrayal thus retarding any possibility of a long lasting solidarity.

    This became self-evident via the collapse of the anti-war movement when serious activists began to raise serious questions about Zionism and the relationship between the U.S. and Israel. It also became evident with Chomsky defense of AIPAC after the Mershiemer and Walt’s revelations.

    So Max YOU once again deliberately misstate the issue. The problem is not that Petras and his followers say that there was NO “Big Oil” involvement it is that YOU and the Chomskyites want to DENY the major role that Zionism in shaping U.S foreign policy.

  194. Max Shields said on August 27th, 2009 at 7:41pm #

    Deadbeat, where in Petras artical does he reference this “Chomskyite leftist” position of “Big Oil”? Unless you think Obama and his tribe represent this “Chomskyite leftist” cabal…do you….really?

    The point that oil companies may not have wanted an invasion, a destablization of the region, of course makes sense. No corporate or hegemon wants to risk the flow of oil…the most precious of 20/21st century resources to any growing and expanding empire.

    But that does not mean that oil is not the ultimate aim. The region has oil…what else does it have of interest to say, the US or China, or Russia, or the EU or Japan? Nothing else.

    One has choices, they’re not good, but an empire does what it has to do when forced to stablize what it saw as an ever growing destablized region…call it stupid…call it irrational…call it warmongering…call it internationally criminal…call it imperial aggression…no matter, the Empire needs oil like you and I need oxygen. It’s that simple.

    The chess board was in play, Saddam into Kuwait, whose oil is it anyway if the Kuwait decides to drill horizontally and cross the “border” into Iraq, fuck it, Saddam says, and he invaded Kuwait, the bastard…all bets are off…and the US…that’s our fucking oil you’re messing with Saddam…dumbhead…and the torch was lit and off for a decade of cat and mouse…with the Iraqi people, like the Palestinian people, squashed in this deadly game…but who cares? US citizens…Nah…not as Clinton bombed the shit out of Baghdad and as children died needlessly of contaminated water, and lack of medicenes and availability of medical facilities do to on going blockades and US terrorist air raids.

    And than George W. Bush came in and 911 happened, and shit just got worse…but all the while it was about setting up bases in this region and making sure that oil…the blood of our life oil was secured before those bastards in Saudi Arabia started blowing up pipelines and sending the West in to a tailspin so severe people would be freezing their balls off in up state NY because there’s no heating oil and the South would fry itself to death because the airconditioned nightmare came to a stretching halt.

    And what about Zionism in all this mayhem and human tragedy? Well for you Deadbeat it helps you pass your days away thinking if only, if only we could get rid of those fucking Zionists, we could all live in peace and harmony…dream on Deadbeat…and get real…you still don’t understand POWER…how its taken and how its kept.

    And you don’t understand how the wealthy get wealthy and the poor get poorer…which is why you keep looking for the Zionists to solve all of our problems…

  195. Deadbeat said on August 28th, 2009 at 1:27am #

    Max once again you react rather than THINK…

    Deadbeat, where in Petras artical does he reference this “Chomskyite leftist” position of “Big Oil”? Unless you think Obama and his tribe represent this “Chomskyite leftist” cabal…do you….really?

    You know Max perhaps your MEMORY is short so here a passage from a James Petras article where he calls Chomsky on his B.S It was posted right here on DV 7/17/2008

    Here’s the passage from the article…

    Noam Chomsky has long been one of the great obfuscators of AIPAC and the existence of Zionist power over US Middle East policy. One of his most blatant examples of cover-up occurred during the AIPAC conference in early June 2008. In answer to a question on what it would take to change US unconditional support for Israel, Chomsky ignored the servility of US Presidential candidates to Israel and the AIPAC at the AIPAC conference; Congressional approval of AIPAC authored sanctions resolutions and their implementation by Treasury Department Under-Secretary Levey; the role of the ZPC in shaping media demonizing of Iran, Palestine, Hezbollah and Syria. Instead Chomsky engages in vacuous circumlocution. With reference to US support for Israel, he claims, “We have to consider the sources of support. The corporate sector in the US, which dominates policy formation, appears to be quite satisfied with the current situation. One indication is the increasing flow of investment to Israel by Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft and other leading elements of the high tech economy. Military and intelligence relations remain very strong. Since 1967, US intellectuals have had a virtual love affair with Israel, for reasons that relate more to the US than to Israel, in my opinion. That strongly affects portrayal of events and history in media and journals.”

    Chomsky deliberately omits the elementary step of actually looking at the process of ‘policy formation’ and noting the role of the AIPAC lobby in shaping US Middle Eastern policy, a point noted by every major expert, Congressional staffer and observer on and off the scene. He mentions ‘the corporate sector’, a vague entity without mentioning how the Zionist lobby has successfully blocked the major oil companies from investing billions in Iran and who undermined US investment agreements with pre-war Iraq. None of the high tech investors he cites has ever lobbied to shape US policy in the Middle East, least of all pressured the US to support Israeli occupation and eviction of Palestinians, the invasion of Lebanon, its military attack of Syria. To suggest that Micro-Soft’s Bill Gates has been lobbying for Israel, as Chomsky does, is the height of silliness. But the Presidents of the 52 Major Jewish Organizations in America have. No conference organized by high-tech companies have ever drawn 65% of the members of Congress and the Senate and all major Presidential candidates to pledge their allegiance to their corporate interests in Israel. But the AIPAC conference in June drew a huge majority of Congress members and McCain, Obama and Clinton who pledged their unconditional support for Israel’s policies and interests.

    Chomsky’s claim that the US has a love affair with Israel omits the systematic repression by pro-Israel and mostly Jewish professors of any critics of Israel, including the firing, smearing and censorship of critical fellow academics. What makes Chomsky’s simple-minded and blatant cover up of Zion-power in shaping US policy so grotesque is that it occurs at a time when it is at its highest point of power – when AIPAC has presidential candidates publicly swearing unconditional support to Israel at its major conference in Washington even as two top officials of AIPAC have been indicted for espionage for Israel.

    Chomsky, [Bill] Moyers and [Thomas] Powers (and a host of liberal critics of US threats to bomb Iran) ignore the power of US Zionists backing of Israel’s overt war exercises and naked threats to bomb Iran. By covering up the role of the ZPC, who are the principle Congressional and Presidential backers of sanctions, embargo and war, the liberal critics undermine our efforts to prevent a catastrophic war.

    Intellectuals silently complicit with the main purveyors of war for Israel are abdicating their responsibility to speak truth to power – in this case Zionist power. At some point intellectual abdication becomes co-responsibility for a Middle East catastrophe. In the face of the complicity of our political leaders and their Zionist mentors in pursuit of Israel’s apocalyptic war strategy toward Iran, the American public becomes of utmost relevance (contrary to Chomsky). To argue otherwise is to become complicit with the great crimes committed in our names, by leaders and ideologues with foreign allegiances.

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

  196. Deadbeat said on August 28th, 2009 at 1:46am #

    The difference between you and me Max is that I don’t have to distort your position to make my point. I can present the facts to support my position and not engage in hyperbole or use ad-hominem rhetoric to support my arguments.

    Like I stated, I not taking side in your debate with B99 only pointing out how you have a habit of DISTORTING your counterparty’s position. You misstated the Petras position which is critical of the Left’s active engagement of obfuscating and deflecting any attention of the growing influence of Zionism on U.S. policy making if not the actual culture.

    Chomsky influence on Leftist activism has AIDED the growth of this dreadfully racist ideology in the United States because he has help to STUNT any awareness so that it can be confronted head on. Why is this important because in order to confront Capitalism, racism MUST also be confronted especially since the support of people of color is VITAL in order to build solidarity in order to challenge the “empire”.

    Failing this perhaps you’ll have pockets of challenges but no where near the cohesion needed to build a MASS and powerful challenge. The ruling class understand this and essentially failing to challenge Zionism WEAKENS any overall challenge.

    All you have to do Max is go back to the 1930’s and understand why the Communists and Socialist took strong anti-racist positions. They knew it was important to defeat racism in order to build working class solidarity. Anyone making excuses for racism BETRAYS solidarity and folks like Chomsky who apologizes for and denies Zionism are reactionaries that in the end retards any effort to truly confront “The Empire”.

    You don’t seem to understand that Max and that is why you distort the Petras position. You claim to be serious but in the end your bourgeois adherence to privilege overrun your thought process.

  197. Max Shields said on August 28th, 2009 at 4:17am #

    The difference Deadbeat is you NEVER answer any of the questions I pose…you march on as if the only case that matters is how much of this is Chomskyite-talk or pure unadultered Zionism. That’s the limitation of your world view.

    It makes for some fun bantering, from my perspective, but it’s a rather dull and vacuous means of describing complexity.

    Power and the limits of Power would lead you far and wide. Instead you choose to just repeat and repeat. I’ll give you a A for unbending consistency…regardless of facts.

    But for you we need to go through Petras’s archive files to see where he mentions Chomsky. I have no interest in Chomsky/Petras one-sided “fight”. Does Chomsky ever reply to Petras? Does he even acknowledge their “differences”? And beside a few uninfluential souls, who cares?

    I think, as has been mentioned that Petras has done some good scholarly work on Latin America; and I tend to agree, for what it’s worth on his general thoughts about the latest Iranian election. But he has a blind spot of proportionality. While he unlike you (because you Zionist-world-view limits you, tho no doubt, you’ll say differently in response just to prove me “wrong” (: ) does see the US as a mammoth empire; but his sense of Zionist influence and power, as strong as it is, is way out of proportion. And he’s using big oil as a way to make his case…and it’s a bogus argument. If Chomsky has said big oil is the reason for US intervention and occupation, than I strongly disagree. It is oil, but not necessarily the oil companies that are called the shots.

    By the way, and for the record, I do think that Chomsky has a proportionality problem as well in his underestimation of the power of AIPAC.

  198. Max Shields said on August 28th, 2009 at 5:18am #

    On the B99 issue, Deadbeat, you have not followed it. You are imposing your own failed attempts to make your case with that of B99.

    I have not mis-represented anyone’s case. B99 does not respond to specifics and lapses into one red herring discussion after another.

    Where have I mis-represented what you have stated? Your mo is consistent. You rant on about Zionism and Chomsky, merging one with the other. If Chomsky argues that the US is an empire…than he must be hiding the real motive – Zionism. If Chomsky states oil and other precious natural resources drive US foreign policy, particularly in the M.E., then again he’s just shielding Zionist Israel. If he uses the word US hegomony in the region, then, again this is a Zionist ploy. And so, whenever I or others use these terms or views of American empire (something well founded before Chomsky could even write his name) you refer to them as Chomskyite zionists.

    Is suspect you’ll deny the above and say “I’m mis-representing” what you’ve “said”. But we both know I’m right. (You may even concede the use of the term “empire” because Petras does…such is your mo).

  199. bozh said on August 28th, 2009 at 6:41am #

    folks, we need to distinguish btwn factual statements and accusations, opinions, conclusions, other inferences.
    Altho i respect petras an denjoy reading most of his pieces, i find that in the passage by petras that DB brings us, there ar eto many conclusions, accusations and maybe just a a fwe facts.
    Examples: … servility of presidential candidates….; …. chomsky’s simple-minded and blatant cover up….; …. their zionsit mentors…; ….zionist power….; ..they are part of the problem…, etc.

    Altho i espy that chomsky does not respect the right of return or push for one state solution, he had long ago condemned jewish orgs for their intolerance of anyone’s facts that proved israel was a terrorist state.

    In petras` piece there may not be even one descriptive statement. We cannot get an elucidation of what is going on in US unless we are told what is going on.
    “Abdicating their responsibilty“ appears as a generalized statement; in this case an accusation. What is missing is what kind of responsibilities?
    To whom? To the ruling class and thus thieves and murderers?
    Or to vast number of nonruling americans?

    In addition, time factor is missing. Since when had this been happening? Also, why? Who is abdicating hisher responsibility?
    tnx

  200. United-Socialist-Front said on August 28th, 2009 at 7:54am #

    THE ARGUMENT THAT NOAM CHOMSKY IS AN EVIL ZIONIST IS AN ULTRA-RIGHT WING, LIBERTARIAN CONSPIRACY THEORY OF MANY ULTRA-RIGHT WING, LIBERTARIAN-CONSPIRACY THEORY WEBSITES SUCH AS: INFOWARS, REAL JEW NEWS, WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, RENSE.COM, PRISON PLANET, ETC.

    I WOKE UP TO THE TRUTH OF THE ULTRA-RIGHT WING, LIBERTARIAN CONSPIRACY-THEORY GATEKEEPERS WEBSITES.

    .

  201. bozh said on August 28th, 2009 at 10:15am #

    usf,
    wld it not be better to describe what people do than to call them names?Hadn’t US slain/maimed people in most regions of our; oops, their world?
    And isn’t our world [by inheritance] their world by usurpation of moral precepts and laws and theft of all kinds and not just lands?
    I’d say yes; the planet is theirs now!
    yes, chomsky appears to favor a two-state solution which now appears clearly a win-loss ‘solution’. Win for US/Israel and loss for all of us.
    we all wld feel injustice on our own skins because it wldn’t be a win-win solution
    Methinks, that 99.99% of ‘jews’ want a win-loss ‘solution’. Unless a human being renounces being ‘jewish’ and thus clings to or is connected to talmudic laws or a sense of “jewishness”, that human being, perforce, may be called at least a mini zionist.
    That includes chomsky. And i speak as an egalitarian and strong socialist. tnx

  202. Suthiano said on August 28th, 2009 at 2:12pm #

    bozh,

    yes, we need to focus on descriptions, on vivid language rather than exhausted labels and meaningless jargon.

    large problem today is with language and meaning. airwaves are designed to replace meaningful dialogue with empty cliches… situations are recreated over and over through this trap of language… it actually creates a landscape that we operate in.

    so if we want to recreate failures of “communists” in north america we should continue to use old jargon and we can expect same “pinko” jargon coming back our way. we can recreate scenes over and over. elites won’t mind one bit.

  203. Max Shields said on August 28th, 2009 at 2:55pm #

    Precisely. The old left/right paradigm is worse than useless today because it doesn’t measure up to the problem. It traps us in a meaningless dialog that goes no where.

    Labels are extemely limiting and disregard anything but a kind of ideosyncratic dogma.

    Sadly we are hindered from honest problem solving because sides must be artifically chosen. For example: Nuclear energy brings with it enormous problems, while focused on a single problem: alternative to fossil. But, if Iran is interested in expanding the world’s nuclear energy program we become trapped in a pseudo argument about a weapons program. The latter is laced with all kinds of geopolitics that has nothing to do with the sanity or insanity of a NUCLEAR ENERGY program.

    Get my drift?

    If Israel represents a military state and quasi theocracy that we justifiably condemn, then why is it ok for various Arab oligarchies to go on with their gun running and dogmatic theorcratic states?

    I would argue that state-hood is extremely problematic whether it be the creation of Israel or Palestine. What’s this about a “homeland”. Of course people should have a place they call home, a geograpical location; but why a “state”. What is the purpose of a state other than to create pathological disasters like the USA, China, Saudi Arabia, Israel…yes there are the quiet Northern European states, but they are so tiny that they are best thought of as city-states with a surrounding region. As I’ve said, scale is perhaps the most important determiner of sustainability.

    Take the two-state solution that Chomsky espouses. What’s the point in creating a state for Jews and a state for Palestinians? Why? Will it bring peace to separate, say, Arab Jews from Arab Muslims? Or is the point to accommodate, European Zionists who do not really want two-states?

    Then there is the pseudo-issue of whether “big oil” or Zionists launched US into the Iraq invasion and occupaton?

    What matters is what doesn’t matter to most who go round and round on these circular arguments: the people, the children, infants, women, men, young and old who are slaughtered, whose lives are ruined for generations, whose homes are devasted. And what creates this tragedy. The farmer, the fisherman, the lawyer, the doctor, the peasant, the teacher…? No, it is the STATE and its arsenal of war and propaganda.

  204. bozh said on August 28th, 2009 at 4:08pm #

    Suthiano, max,
    to me and some other people, ascribing multicausality to any event and to any war in particular, gives us a better elucidation than ascribing one or two causes for events.
    yes, oil was a factor for invasion of iraq. Establishing a permament presence in iraq was, imo, even of greater strategic and tactical value to the west and US/israel. Greed also appears as a stronger factor than oil for any US invasion.
    We can postulate other factors for all warfare: fear, delusional thinking, supremacism, miseducation, brazen lies, demonization, accusations, blame, glorification of warriors and generals, illusion of greatness for one’s conquests, omission of facts, desire to get even, hatred, stupidities, evaluating conclusions as facts; presenting conclusions/wishful thinking as facts.
    One cld postulate as a factor in recent wars planet getting poorer, warmer.
    By raising the price of oil at will by ‘unknown’ people, US warfare may cost less or nothing. When the price of gas jumps from c8o $1.44 in a span of weeks or months, where is the governance as watchdog?
    If meat or bread prices wld rise as much as oil, i am sure gov’t of US wld be alarmed.

    Or, we may be on the road to becoming better humans than we were up to now. But nature cld speed up with our improvement!?. We, too, are part of nature. Nature is infinitely valued and so are we.
    some of us are more human than others. Such people don’t get involved, it seems to me, in governing.
    It appears that the worst scoundrels take over. In short, gangsters rule. Mafia has simply espied this and behaved thus. We [90% of us] also shld form a mafioso orgt. tnx

  205. Max Shields said on August 28th, 2009 at 4:46pm #

    Bozh,

    Agree that there are many fathers of this invasion, but invading a nation is not a whim, and it is done because it strikes at the heart of the invader (whether this is considered rational or irrational – one could say all wars are irrational).

    Greed only exists if one is “greedy” FOR something. Greed does not exist in a vacuum. So, a simple deduction is why would the US be greedy? Greedy for what? And why?

    It’s easy to dismiss or make like of oil if you forget that almost everything that exists in the so-called “civilized world” today is based on it. There is no replacement for what oil does. It is not some nice thing to have; it is the life blood of much of what exists, that is not natural.

    Here, Bozh, I find a particularly weak argument from you. Imagine the world’s oil is significantly diminished, and then depleted. What do you think would happen? Millions upon millions would perish. People could not live much further north than the Mason/Dixon line in the US. We’d have no transportation but horse and bugey…no electricity; only wood and some coal would serve as heating fuel.

    Our food system – 98% or better totally dependent on oil. How can you be so flippant as to dismiss the critical importance of oil. There is simply no replacement for what oil has afforded: NONE. When discovered and used in the mid-19th Century…it was like a lottery ticket that bought the notion endless consumption. It is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Without it the world’s population would shrink not by the millions but by the billions.

    Again, what is greed if not the greed to keep this existence going and going with the only means known to humans – OIL.

  206. United-Socialist-Front said on August 28th, 2009 at 7:27pm #

    Max Shields: Hi, i agree totally with you. Wars are not exactly evil perse or just because the people who rule the US government are evil. But imperialist wars have to be analyzed from a scientific, marxist analysis of the capitalist system. I know that there was an anti-marx propaganda in America, i don’t know why, but i think that the anti-marx agenda in the US media in the 1950s and before, was done so that USA won’t become a state-capitalist welfare regulated economic system or a socialist-state system and capitalist rulers know that statist, regulated systems are not good economic models where you could become a millionaire, and have an Island, a yat and alot of assets all for yourself, which is what the US capitalist Rockefellerian system has enabled the top 1% of USA to do.
    But this system would grind to a halt without imperial-wars. Imperial-wars are a consequence of the capitalist system, and not a consequence of evil intentions in the heart of Bush, neocons and top warmonger democrats. But imperial wars are part of the capitalist monopoly developed system. Without it the capitalist system would collapse.

    .

  207. Nasir Khan said on August 29th, 2009 at 3:58am #

    In response to Petras’ article that I had posted on Marxism list, Jeff Meisner wrote the following on August 25, 2009 (for full comments, see Marxism Digest, Vol. 70, Issue 62) :

    “24/08/09 +0200, Nasir Khan wrote:
    [see [Marxism] The US War against Iraq: The Destruction of a Civilization]
    [full text: http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/08/the-us-war-against-iraq/

    by James Petras, Dissident Voice, August 21, 2009

    The US seven-year war and occupation of Iraq is driven by several
    major political forces ….

    [including] the following (in order of importance).

    Unfortunately the quote ends there so you do not get Petras’ “list” of
    political forces behind the Iraq war unless you go to the full article as I
    did. What you will find is exactly TWO items on his list (of why the US
    went to war in Iraq), which are, “in order of importance”:

    1) What he calls “The Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC),” essentially
    referring to JEWS in the US government whose “top priority was to advance
    Israel’s agenda.”

    and (of less importance):
    2) “Civilian militarists (like Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney)”
    who are NOT JEWISH.

    I’m sorry to boil it down to this, but that is just about what he says; I
    don’t think that I misread it! My revulsion isn’t just that his “analysis”
    is wrong, as most people reading this will recognize (but I’m not putting
    it beyond debate). I’m worried about the EFFECT of framing the issue in
    such terms which go beyond analysis and into ethnic identification of the
    enemy. That has a miseducational effect on the left (the majority of those
    who would be reading this) and misrepresents the legitimate positions of
    the left which oppose western imperialism without requiring (in the first
    instance) a distinction between the interests of the US and the Israeli
    ruling classes, let alone identifying the ethnicity of US government leaders.

    I don’t want to be dogmatic and certainly an in-depth analysis of
    individuals/ideologues involved in government decisions can discuss all
    aspects of their background. But it is clearly troubling when one’s
    analysis of a imperialist nation going to war requires an ethnic
    identification of the leaders who are considered responsible, especially
    when it is further stated that they are acting in the “interests of a
    foreign power.” Petras essentially says that, but being a leftist doesn’t
    go so far as to call them “disloyal” or acting against the interests of the
    US as is openly charged by right-wing “antiwar” forces such as Paul Craig
    Roberts and Jeff Gates, whose columns have also been forwarded to this list
    by Nasir Khan, with equal disregard.

    BTW my objections here are not directed to Nasir Khan, the poster, who
    apparently doesn’t read what’s posted to the list (or if he does, he has
    essentially never reacted to what someone else has written). I assume he
    isn’t reading this (but if you are, please prove me wrong!). I am worried
    about this form of discourse infecting the left, or even being seen as
    acceptable. There does exist, especially in the US, a right-wing antiwar
    movement (antiwar.com, Pat Buchanan, etc.) and they never fail to direct
    their anger against Israel. Indeed most of what they say about either the
    US government or Israel and their filthy wars is not unlike our own
    propaganda. But you can look a little deeper and they generally betray
    their identification of Zionism with “Jews” and an international link which
    is tantamount to the “International Jewish Conspiracy” theories of yesteryear. . . . ”
    —————————————————-
    My reply to Jeff Meisner on August 27, 2009, Marxism Digest, Vol. 70, Issue 67.

    I welcome Jeff’s comments in response to Petras’ article I had posted. I assure him that I do read some of the articles or comments on the list, but due to a busy time schedule I don’t find time to read all the enlightening stuff on the list. However, this is my explanation, not a justification! But I have read what he has written and also Petras’ article.

    Those who have cared to read the full article must have seen that Petras’ main focus was on the destruction of Iraq wrought by American invaders and their allies. This he did by describing the military strategy of the Washington rulers. The US neocolonial policies, war in Iraq, wider strategic goals of American power in the Middle East and South Asia, a systematic destruction and assassinations of Iraqi intellectuals, academics and scientists are clearly put forth by Petras. How the American rulers destroyed a modern country in the Middle East and physically annihilated its intellectuals and killed 1.3 million Iraqis is a living testimony to what American imperialism stands for.

    One would have hoped that the Left in general would show solidarity with the oppressed people of Iraq (and Afghanistan and Pakistan where Obama recently has escalated and extended the war and the killing of the people) who have been under the heels of American brutal military power. In this struggle the work of all those who oppose American wars of aggression and annihilation of nations needs support for the broader objective of combating American imperialism and its allies. Seen against this background, the work of people from different socio-political background and disparate cultural identities is instrumental in waging such a struggle. Despite some ideological differences some may have against some of the leading opponents of American wars and policies, I admire the work and the moral courage of people like Petras, Paul Craig Roberts and Jeff Gates. I am fully aware that some on the Left do not like their work.

    Jeff has concentrated only on the political force of the Zionist Power and the American neocon militarists that Petras mentioned in the beginning of his article. If Petras has touched some raw nerve of any by his critique of Zionist Power then I can understand the reaction he has met. However, it is also possible that he could have formulated his views in a more pliant way that could have gone down well with those who find any such critique unsavoury that bluntly questions the role of the Zionist Power in American politics at home and on US foreign policy and imperial wars in the Middle Eastern region. How Petras could have said or not said on this specific issue that Jeff is concerned with is something that can be a topic of a lengthy discussion.

    However, the danger of ‘miseducational effect’ that Jeff refers to in Petras’ analysis is the ethnic identification of the American high officials in the Bush administration. I think here again Jeff in his otherwise nicely-worded comments could have at least admitted the role of religious Right, the New Crusaders, plays in fighting Islam (and Muslims), the Old Enemy. But he seems to have had some other concerns which his comments show.

    We all know that a Christian fundamentalist president, George W. Bush, had a ‘divine mission’ to accomplish and he had many well-wishers around his heavenly-mandated mission to kill Muslims. This he did in the most effective way, no doubt. That does not mean that his starting the war on Iraq was solely due to this factor alone. Of course, there were other factors, such as, Iraqi oil, US hegemony over the whole Middle East and furthering the goals of Zionist Israel (Petras: ‘the interests of a foreign power’!). Secondly, Petras’ naming of some top Zionists policymakers and influential officials in the Bush administration who stood for blind support for Israel no matter what Israel did cannot be regarded as identifying such officials with any particular ethnicity. Zionists are not an ethnic group; they belong to diverse colours and creeds and faiths. But their defining characteristic is their adherence to the semi-religious but political ideology of Zionism and their uninhibited support for the policies of Israel. Those who identify Zionism with Jews, as Jeff rightly points out, are obviously mistaken. But the power of the Zionists over the Jewish populations in America, Europe and the rest of the world is a political fact.

    Lastly, despite oft-repeated myths and claims, Jews are not an ethnic group or a race. They belong to different races and have all possible colours ranging from the Nordic blonds to the dark skin Africans. Any common identity they have is to a religion and to some of their cultural traditions. But in the present political situation some prominent anti-Zionist Jews have adamantly upheld the banner of freedom and stood against the policies of US imperialism and Zionism. For me, they are the true friends of the oppressed people of Iraq, Afghanistan and the occupied people of Palestine.

  208. balkas b b said on August 29th, 2009 at 7:06am #

    max,
    I’ve said this numerous times: greedy for the resources! And why? Because, i postulate, of fear of being lesser-valued, poorer, etc., if not in control of resources.
    I’ve never stated that oil is not important. And i have often stated that the oil belongs to the empires and at the wildly fluctuating price that suits them.

    Actually, one cld go further than that and affirm that if morality and legality wld be respected, every resource, and not just oil, wld belong not only to each land but to each person.
    This wld obviate most wars!
    Today, of course, there is no nationality in US nor does US respect any moral tenet or law that does not aid US in robbery.
    So, to evaluate any event, but leave this fact out, is a lost labor.

    Max, i have to bring u up: it’s one of the oldest tricks to use own [re]label to stand for what it had been said and then use the new label as proof that what was said was wrong or as u say “weak argument”.
    I did not say that! Why wld one call positing known and postulated causes for cancer or war, be called even an argument let alone weak argument, when one can simply say that one does not think any of the causes posited are true and then go on and posit own.

    sorry to say, but so many commenters use such subterfuges! Lesson number one: one must endeavor to learn how to talk! tnx

  209. Max Shields said on August 29th, 2009 at 7:28am #

    bozh,

    While I agree again, that resources must be part of a common, oil is not just important (you did say that, again if you think I’m mis-quoting you) it is VITAL. It is not simply a precious metal like gold that one hoards to obtain its associated riches.

    So, the weakness of your argument, and I will say it again, is not that we disagree on most of the points here, but that others here, the very argument of this whole post, is to down play its importance, to think that ideology is the cause of the US invasion into Iraq. I’m not clear on whether or not you think that or not, but you, again, make it sound that way from your posts.

    If you like chocolate and are greedy to have more than me…I may not care because I don’t care about chocolate…you can have all the chocolate you can consume…but if you say, I’m taking all the oxygen and you’ll have to fight me for any of it…then we have a very different story. Oil is like oxygen, not chocolate.