[wvns] Israel Shamir: Right Ho, Lobby

Right Ho, Lobby
By Israel Shamir

The inhabitants of a stately house are embroiled in an interminable
quarrel; engagement rings are returned and the cook sends in his
resignation. In this hour of bloody mess, smart valet Jeeves (played
by Stephen Fry in the BBC series) finds the disputants a common enemy.
United by their common animosity towards this empty-headed Bertie
Wooster, the lovers tread the matrimonial aisle, and the servants
proclaim their renewed loyalty to their masters. Peace is restored.
This ruse, applied in Right Ho, Jeeves, a pleasantry by P.G.
Wodehouse, was recently employed with great success by the nefarious
force often described as the Zionist Lobby.

In a letter addressed to the Times' Editor, yesterday's adversaries
are united, as were the lovers in the Wodehouse novel. [See the full
list at the bottom]

There is a Nobel Peace laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu, enemy of
apartheid and friend of Palestine. Last week, the Jewish community
caused on the Minnesota University of St Thomas to ban him.
And a flamboyant Zionist, "Mr Lobby", Bernard-Henri Lévy, the hairy
heir to a slave owners' fortune. He usually bashes Blacks and
Palestinians in his frequent TV appearances. When his Negrophobe
friend Alain Finkelkraut was sued for his too-explicit racist talk,
Levy defended him.

There is Mairead Maguire, the brave Irish fighter for Palestine, who
befriended our prisoner-of-conscience Mordecai Vanunu.

And Russian arch-Zionist Elena Bonner, a passionately anti-Muslim,
anti-Communist, neo-liberal Reaganite. She fought against the "Evil
Empire" for the rights of Russian Jews to immigrate to Israel and take
over the homes of Palestinian refugees.

There is the great Nobel-Prize-winning playwright Harold Pinter, who
spoke so passionately against the Iraq war.

And Zbigniew Brzezinski, the man who gave you the Afghani war with its
millions of refugees – and boasted of it.[1] Anti-Communist to a boot
and a hater of Russia, he provoked the Soviet intervention of 1980 and
guided Osama bin Laden's participation.

Our brave actress, Vanessa Redgrave, who fought and suffered from the
Lobby's attacks, and leading French Zionist Andre Glucksmann, member
of the anti-Communist liberal left, who supported the Chechen
separatists and the war. There are even both an enemy of Pinochet,
Ariel Dorfman and Pinochet's admirer Vladimir Bukovsky.

What united them all, the good, the bad and the ugly? An anonymous NGO
that came into being just yesterday called RAW in WAR. Its proclaimed
purpose is to "recognise women who are defending human rights in zones
of war and conflict". This is a worthy purpose; one would expect
Rachel Corrie, the brave American woman from Seattle, murdered by
Israelis, should be the first to be recognized as such. Rachel Corrie
defended a Palestinian home; she stood in front of it, believing that
a man at the levers of the Caterpillar bulldozer sent to destroy it
would stop at seeing her. But the beast did not stop: he drove on,
smashed her body, and he was later exculpated by the Israeli court,
while the US Jewish Lobby banned the play based on her story with the
words "the antisemite's got what she deserved".

So, Rachel Corrie? Not on your Nellie. The Zionist part of the Times'
list would never make such an error. The person the brand-new NGO is
created to commemorate is the late Russian journalist Anna
Politkovskaya. She was killed a year ago by persons unknown, and the
Zionist neo-Cons are doing all they can to implicate the
too-independent Russian authorities in the murder. Her name, together
with the name of Polonium-killed ex-spy Litvinenko, became a
battle-cry for the neo-liberal anti-Putin forces. The name of
Litvinenko's widow also embellishes the list of illustrious
signatories, just so you don't miss the hint. There is also Daniel
Pearl's widow, to create an association between the fight against
Muslim terrorists and the Warsaw Ghetto fighter Marek Edelman, for the
anti-Nazi angle.

The forces behind the campaign are exceedingly powerful: otherwise, a
totally unknown Bulgarian researcher Mariana Katzarova, the official
chairperson of the NGO, would not be able to connect to so many lords
and ladies, archbishops and barons, Nobel laureates, writers and VIPs
to create this tour-de-force of a list. These forces have to be
stronger than Berezovsky and Nevzlin, the two exiled oligarchs who
were doing the spin about Litvinenko and Politkovskaya in their
private vendetta against Putin. The events in memory of Politkovskaya
were organised by the New World Order destabilisation shock troops,
a.k.a. National Endowment for Democracy, or NED, a US
government-funded organisation "set up to legally continue the CIA's
prohibited activities of support to selected political parties abroad
[1]". Clearly the new NGO's aim is to put pressure on the Russian
president who adamantly refuses to give a green light to Israeli and
American bombing of Iran, who supplies Syria with its air defence
systems and who put a halt to the oligarchs' asset-stripping of Russia.

I do not intend to besmirch memory of the murdered journalist, and it
is not necessary to do so in order to defend Putin. Anna Politkovskaya
presented no danger to his regime, being quite unknown to general
public. She could have run afoul of some persons in Chechnya
insurgency or counter-insurgency. Police investigation of her murder
is still going on. Some ten Chechens and a rogue security forces
colonel are in a Moscow jail, implicated in the murder, and the
Russian Attorney General recently declared that the murder mystery is
almost unravelled. Politkovskaya's son expressed his full confidence
in police efforts. He believes that the actual murderers and their
patrons will be found soon. Many Russian observers believe the murder
was ordered by persons desiring to undermine Russian society and to
frame Putin. I also expressed this view. This technique would recall
that used in Lebanon, where anti-Syrian activists were reportedly
killed by pro-Israeli gunmen in order to create a backlash.

The Russian government and people condemned the assassination of
Politkovskaya; the police are investigating and the family is
satisfied with the progress. What else is needed? But the neo-Cons are
not satisfied with this simple truth: they try to use her dead body to
undermine the Putin regime. Unwillingly, her name has become a taunt.
And the letter to the Times marches to the neo-Con beat.

Nobody can fault the signatories of the letter to the Times for what
they wrote. They wrote very carefully: "We call on the Russian
Government to bring to justice, in full conformity with international
standards, both those who killed Anna Politkovskaya and those who have
ordered her murder." It is impossible to refuse to sign such a letter:
don't we all wish for such a conclusion? And yet it is impossible to
sign: do we want to push Putin into surrendering to Bush's wishes?
What is the purpose of this letter? It is to show that the Zionists
can mobilise even dedicated anti-Zionists and anti-war activists
against Russia. Do we really want that?

This reminds me of the Wallenberg case. Raul Wallenberg, a Swedish
diplomat in the Nazi Germany and Hungary, saved many Jews by providing
them with Swedish passports and visas. In 1945 he was arrested by
Soviet security in Budapest as a spy, and died in jail in 1947. But he
was not allowed to rest in peace: the Zionists invented a fairy tale
that he survived and is kept in a secret jail somewhere in Russia.
They turned his name into a taunt. Until the collapse of the USSR,
they made thousands of rallies – from Washington to Wellington -
demanding the "release of Wallenberg". Many well-meaning westerners
participated in these demonstrations, thereby contributing to the
demise of the USSR, ushering in the present unipolar world of
Judeo-American hegemony. Only after 1991 the Zionists let off abusing
Wallenberg's name, for his death in 1947 could no longer be denied.

It is not that the Zionists cared about Swedish diplomats who saved
Jews and were murdered after the war. Another Swedish diplomat in
Germany, who saved many Jews, was Count Folke Bernadotte. Bernadotte
was sent as the UN representative to Palestine in 1948 exactly for
this reason: because he saved many Jews and had enormous sympathy for
Jewish refugees. But he witnessed the mass expulsions, and he demanded
that the Palestinian refugees be allowed to return home to their
villages. A man who later became Israeli Prime Minister assassinated
him. And that was it. The name of Wallenberg is given to streets and
squares in many cities around the world; the name of Bernadotte is
forgotten. This is the power of Jewish Lobby: they can decide whose
name will be known and whose name will be forgotten, who will be
blessed and who will be cursed.

No miracle: they possess most powerful multitasking machine of mass
media and public relations. The USSR did not obey their orders -- the
Soviet media was under the state control, so it had to be destroyed.
They used their plethora of human rights organisations and
humanitarian causes to this end. M-me Bonner and others of her ilk
demanded the right of return for the Russian Jews, while denying the
same right to the Palestinians. Hardly the same: the Palestinians were
actually expelled from their homes, while we Russian Jews were to
"return after two thousand years". There were thousands of rallies all
over the globe, and well-meaning westerners – maybe you? –
participated in demanding this right for Jews and singing Let My
People Go. But there were no rallies demanding the right of return for
the Palestinians. If there were, they remained unreported, and the
participants were blacklisted.

They spoke of lack of human rights in the USSR, until the USSR went
down, and all assets of the Soviet people were appropriated by the
oligarchs. Then, in Yeltsin's days, human rights were apparently well
preserved. But when Putin returned some of these ill-gotten assets
back to the people, the human rights (or their lack) came back into
limelight.

One would be very naïve to accept the human rights mantra at face
value. Yes, I am very sorry for Raul Wallenberg and for Anna
Politkovskaya; but I am equally sorry for Folke Bernadotte and Rachel
Corrie; and I would not sign a petition for the former unless it
contains the names of the latter. Likewise, I regret that an old
American Jew Klinghoffer was killed, but I would not demonstrate about
it for thousands of old Palestinians were killed by Israelis before
and after this event. Do not let our adversary to set an agenda with
his righteous indignation, honeyed words and sophistic devices. Thank
you, we shall set our agenda ourselves.

Otherwise, it is falling in a trap for well-intended people: they can
be persuaded to speak and demonstrate against an injustice even if
being invited by their adversary. And they speak against infringement
of human rights in Cuba, Russia, Iran, Gaza, denying these besieged
states even a psychological respite. Lay off, friends: let us first
deal with the basic right to be alive, for this right is severely
threatened by the US Air force. When this right is assured, we'll deal
with the rest.

Jeeves was right: one should remember the common adversary. The same
thought was well formulated by Carl Schmitt: an enemy is the most
important political asset; and he should be chosen as carefully as a
friend. The real formidable power of the Jewish Lobby lies in its
ability to unite people against its enemy, and to block others'
attempts to unite. This is actually its main political task. When we
try to unite people against Zionists, the Jews activate their "guilt
by association" weapon, and the weak-hearted run away, saying: we do
not want to sign, or demonstrate together with such-and-such, because
he is a right-winger, or a Muslim militant, or a Christian
fundamentalist, or a Stalinist, or a Holocaust denier, or a
nationalist, or a racialist, or a terrorist, or whatever. And our
efforts fall apart.

Their demonization line proves they do not care about human rights or
democracy: they are just using these terms for their own ends. They
demonised Muammar Qaddafi or David Duke or Roger Garaudy or Russian
Communists, but have found no fault with warmongers Bernard Kouchner,
or Zbiegnew Brzezinski, or Ariel Sharon. We all know that Putin served
in the KGB, but we do not hear often that the great liberal hope, the
Israeli Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni, emerged from the secret service.

When they want to unite people, there is no "guilt by association". I
may ask these wonderful (no irony!) people Mairead Maguire, or Desmond
Tutu, or Harold Pinter: "How come you are not worried about putting
your signatures next to those of the war criminal and warmonger
Brzezinski, next to Zionist and Negrophobe Levy, next to arch-thief
Havel who privatised half of Prague for his own benefit?" Probably
they would not even understand me, because there is only one authority
licensed to demonise and issue kosher certificates, and that is the Lobby.

Jews are aware of their ability to create the matrix of demonization,
and they care little about it, as Neo did about the matrix in the
film. Wasn't the Borat movie plainly racist? You bet it was. However,
this Cohen had just to say that he is a Jew, and this password avoided
all further questions. A Jewish organisation could write without
hesitation: "Sacramento's militantly anti-gay Slavic Christians are
suspected of harboring the killer". Is this a racist statement? You
bet it is! If you doubt this, try writing "Sacramento's militantly
anti-goy Jews are suspected of harboring the killer" and see what happens.

In the last German elections, Frau Merkel made quite a few racist
statements, stopping short of suggesting the expulsion of the Turks
living in Germany, but promising to block Turkey's advent into the EU
so no more Turks will come to Germany. She was allowed to say that and
win, because she fully supported Israel and America, and therefore she
was never attacked by the Lobby. As a result, Germany, a key member of
anti-war coalition in 2003, is not that surely against the impending
Iran war.

Beside its right-wing group of neo-Cons, the Lobby has its left-wing
project. In the 1980s, the Zionist Lobby-managed left-liberal
(anti)communists provided the left leg for imperialism, for the war
against the nations, for American hegemony. They were active in the
last decade of the USSR's existence, when the Zionists succeeded in
getting together many good and worthy people, from Jacques Derrida to
Italian Communist leadership, and made them sing in unison, cutting
off the left's natural support for Soviet Russia. Their contribution
to the end of the socialist experiment in Russia was decisive. We no
longer hear of them: these French and Italian liberal communist
parties shrunk to pea size without Zionist support, for they were no
longer needed. Imperialism now firmly stood on its right,
neo-conservative foot. The letter to the Times is a first harbinger of
a weather change: the Zionists have decided to bring their leftist
play back to life. In France, they even present Levy as a symbol of
the "Left's return". With such a Left, who needs the Right?

The human rights idea could be good if these rights were universally
applied. But these paragons of human rights usually stop where it is
convenient for them. They are for minority rights, rights of gays and
rights of bankers and rights of Jews, but they are against the rights
of the majority, the right to live and to bring up children and to
sustain one's family, and the right to go to church or mosque
unmolested. One of the darkest figures of world affairs is Bernard
Kouchner, the new French Foreign Minister. A Zionist and a human
rights activist, he supported all interventions based on human rights
– the bombing of Serbia, the invasions of Somali and Iraq --you name
it. He ruled over NATO-conquered Kosovo, and allowed his pet Albanian
gangs to burn churches and expel the Serbs. Now he supports Bush's
plans to attack Iran and Israel's plans to strangulate Gaza. This is
the face of a human rights paragon.

Nor has alleged socialist Kouchner any problem with serving under
Sarkozy. Sarkozy ran for President under the banner of Le Pen. He took
Le Pen's slogans, Le Pen's ideas and Le Pen's voters, with one big
exception: Le Pen was against the Judeo-American Empire. That is why,
while Le Pen was demonised by the Lobby, Sarkozy was extolled. Now
France is going to renege on the greatest achievement of Charles de
Gaulle, his 1966 liberation of France from the NATO yoke. Sarkozy and
Kouchner are to return French troops under the US command, and to
return American bases onto French soil in the greatest reversal of
French foreign policy since Petain-Laval. The Sarkozy – Kouchner link
gives the lie to the Left-Right dichotomy: leftists and rightists may
be united in the support of Israel and the US, and they may just as
easily be united in its rejection. This question – support or
rejection – is, or should be the Friend or Foe signal on our radars.

This is a question of life and death: if we have a common Zionist
enemy, we shall be at peace; if we have no common enemy, they will
find us other enemies. Putin's Russia, Ahmadinejad's Iran, Hezbollah
and Hamas, Cuba and Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Burma can be turned into
enemies. Until recently, the Arab states were united with Iran and
Hamas in their rejection of Zionist schemes. But now, the Zionists
have offered a different animosity: Sunni Arabs against Shia Persians.
And it has worked: the Arab states have accepted their idea that Iran
is the enemy; and that the Islam of the Hamas government is the enemy.
As soon people forget that Zionism is the main enemy, they are started
on the march to a war.

Equally, democracy is a good idea. But democracy of the word "demos",
people's rule, not from the word "demo" like in "demo version", in
Victor Pelevin's words. The democracy standard bearers gather around
George Bush, they are ready to justify every aggression by the need to
establish democracy; but they reject the right of Palestinians to
elect Hamas, or the right of Venezuelans to elect Chavez, or the right
of Cubans to elect Castro, or the right of Russians to elect Putin.
NED, the National Endowment for Democracy, the CIA-financed subversive
organisation (they organise various events in memory of Anna
Politkovskaya) are actually the greatest enemies of democracy because
their democracy is a tool of subjugation to the Judeo-American
paradigm. What's worse, in Russia and Burma, Cuba and Venezuela, the
leaders become wary of democracy, and this is an unfortunate development.

Thus the distinction between Zionists and non-Zionists is the most
important distinction -- the great divide between war and peace, life
and death. Do not cross this line-- read the Friend or Foe signs. Do
not support the enemy's initiatives even if they appear to be of
wonderful intention. Always remember the bottom line: what is the
purpose of a petition, of a rally, of a letter? If we shall set the
agenda, we can usher in peace; if we shall follow their agenda, we
shall face war.

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

WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE

To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/

Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
Please consider donating to WVNS today.
Email ummyakoub@yahoo.com for instructions.

To leave this list, send an email to:
wvns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/join

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:wvns-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:wvns-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wvns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/