As with various entertainment platforms, Netflix has been willingly subsumed into the Israeli hasbara industry
Back in 2016, the Israeli embassy in the United States tweeted with regard to Netflix’s global expansion: “For the 5+/- days a year the weather’s not good… @Netflix, now in Israel!”
What fortune, indeed, that Israel managed to erect itself on stolen land with such favourable meteorology.
And speaking of luck, Netflix has proven itself a veritable godsend for Israel, for a lot more than five days out of the year.
As with various entertainment platforms, Netflix has been willingly subsumed into the Israeli hasbara industry.
The latest pro-Israel production to grace subscribers’ screens is the six-part Netflix series The Spy, starring Sacha Baron Cohen as Israel’s celebrated Mossad agent Eli Cohen, executed in Damascus in 1965.
Predictably, the series humanises Cohen as a humble, loving and dedicated patriot engaged in noble subterfuge on behalf of innocent Israelis under attack from dastardly Syria.
No mention is made of Israel’s preeminent role as attacker-provocateur, while its history of mass slaughter in the service of predatory regional designs is – as usual – disappeared under the mantra of “self-defence”.
The point of Israeli propaganda is to invert the victimiser-victim relationship
But The Spy is only the beginning. Search “Israel” on Netflix and you’re bombarded with all sorts of offerings, from Inside the Mossad to Fauda, a series about “a top Israeli agent [who] comes out of retirement to hunt for a Palestinian fighter he thought he’d killed”.
In the trailer, we learn that “Abu Ahmad has the blood of 116 Israelis on his hands” and that “no other terrorist has killed so many: men, women, children, elderly, soldiers”.
The point of Israeli propaganda is to invert the victimiser-victim relationship, such that Israel’s institutionalised terrorisation of Palestinians is somehow retaliatory in nature, while those on the receiving end of more than seven decades of Israeli aggression are cast in the role of aggressors.
The moral of the story
The Netflix list goes on. Also featured are two films titled The Angel and The Spy Who Fell to Earth, released in 2018 and 2019, respectively, and concerning the same character: Egyptian Ashraf Marwan, son-in-law of late president Gamal Abdel Nasser.
In their book Spies Against Armageddon: Inside Israel’s Secret Wars, Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman note that Marwan was the coordinator of a 1973 Libyan-Egyptian-Palestinian plot to shoot down an Israeli El Al airliner in Italy, in response to Israel’s shooting down of a Libyan airliner, which killed 105 people on board.
Marwan personally delivered the requisite missiles to the appointed Palestinians in Rome, but “the plot failed … What the Libyan, Egyptian, and Palestinian conspirators never knew was the secret about Marwan: He was a paid agent for the Mossad, one of the best Israel ever had.”
While the moral of the story for Arabs is perhaps that spying for Israel is a good way to achieve posthumous Netflix stardom, this particular anecdote should also effectively annihilate Israel’s claims to have the wellbeing and security of its citizens at heart.
Then there’s When Heroes Fly, the 2018 series about four Israeli military veterans traumatised by the 2006 war on Lebanon; just because Israel did the vast majority of killing and other damage doesn’t mean the role of victim should be wrested from its soldiers.
A Haaretz article assures us that “Netflix’s New Israeli Thriller ‘When Heroes Fly’ Is Almost as Much Fun as ‘Fauda’” and that the series is “gripping enough to satisfy anyone with a ‘Fauda’-shaped hole in their lives”. To be sure, it’s hard to think of anything more fun than war and trauma.
Last but not least, there’s the Netflix filmThe Red Sea Diving Resort, about the Mossad’s white-saviour efforts in the 1980s to evacuate Ethiopian Jews via Sudan to the Promised Land.
The film is directed by Gideon Raff, who also created The Spy and Hatufim, the inspiration for everyone’s favourite racist series, Homeland – to which Raff contributed as well. Talk about finding your niche.
Apparently, there’s nothing incongruous about Israelis wailing over death and displacement in Ethiopia – and the moral imperative to save the victims – when the entire Israeli enterprise is built on, well, death and displacement.
The Nakba in 1948 saw hundreds of Palestinian villages destroyed, 15,000 Palestinians murdered, and an additional 750,000 forced to flee their homes.
The pattern of ethnic cleansing has only continued since, punctuated by straight-up bouts of slaughter.
In what can only be described as a spectacle of utter shamelessness, The Red Sea Diving Resort includes lines like this one from a blond female Israeli agent: “We’re all just refugees, aren’t we?”
The film ends with the reminder that “there are currently more than 65 million displaced refugees around the world”; to hell with the fact that, thanks to Israel, there are well over seven million Palestinian ones.
And while a male agent in the film alleges that there’s “another bloody genocide” transpiring in Ethiopia but that “nobody gives a shit because it’s in Africa”, Israel’s genocidal quest to wipe out Palestinian identity is evidently of no similar concern.
As it turns out, my own Netflix search for “Palestine” – ditto for “Lebanon” and “Syria” – produced largely the same smorgasbord of Israeli spy thrillers and other “fun”.
When I tried searching “Nakba”, the top result was Bad Boys II, starring Martin Lawrence and Will Smith; a bit further down was The Red Sea Diving Resort.
I recently contacted Netflix for a response to criticism that it serves as a venue for Israeli propaganda, and received the following statement from a spokesperson: “We’re in the business of entertainment, not media or politics.
“We understand that not all viewers will like all of the programming we offer. It’s why we have a diverse range of content from all over the world – because we believe that great stories come from anywhere.
All Netflix shows feature ratings and information to help members make their own decisions about what’s right for themselves and their families.”
Just because there is ‘Arabic content’ on Netflix doesn’t mean it does anything to humanise or contextualise the Palestinian struggle
My attention was also directed to some examples of the “diverse Arabic content on the service and under development”, the first beingComedians of the World, a show featuring 47 international comedians – four of them in the Middle East.
But it’s a far cry from Middle Eastern comedians to the likes of The Spy – which, like all Israel-centric “entertainment”, is inherently political – and just because there is “Arabic content” on Netflix doesn’t mean it does anything to humanise or contextualise the Palestinian struggle.
Netflix’s special relationship with Israel may be lucrative for those involved, but by helping to boost Israel’s ratings in a show of brutality that has already gone on seven decades too long, the company is entirely complicit in Israel’s Palestinian disappearing act.
Zionist Rahm Emanuel, up until recently the mayor of Chicago and before that a top advisor to the president in the Bill Clinton and Barack Obama White Houses and still earlier a volunteer in the Israeli Army, famously once commented that a good crisis should never be allowed to go to waste.
He meant, of course, that a crisis can be exploited to provide cover for other shenanigans involving politicians.
It was an observation that was particularly true when one was working for a sexual predator like Bill, who once attacked a “terrorist” pharmaceutical factory in Sudan to divert attention away from the breaking Monica Lewinski scandal.
To be sure, the United States government is focusing its attention on the coronavirus while also using the cover afforded to heighten the pressure on “enemies” near and far.
As the coronavirus continues to spread, the Trump White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have increased the ferocity of their sabre rattling, apparently in part to deter Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela.
Ironically, of course, none of the countries being intimidated are actually threatening the United States, but we Americans have long since learned that perceptions are more important than facts when it comes to the current occupant of the oval office and his two predecessors.
The latest bit of mendacity coming out of the White House was a presidential tweet targeting the usual punching bag, Iran. Based on an incident that occurred two weeks ago, Trump threatened “I have instructed the United States Navy to shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea.”
Iran’s flying gunboats are clearly a formidable force but it is certainly reassuring to note that naval anti-aircraft fire has been directed to deal with them.
The U.S. Navy ships in question are, one might also observe, in a body of water generally referred to as the Persian Gulf, where they are carrying out maneuvers right off of the Iranian coast.
Meanwhile, Iranian flying gunboats have not yet been observed off of New Jersey, but they are probably waiting to be transported to the Eastern Seaboard by those huge trans-oceanic gliders that once upon a time were allegedly being constructed by Saddam Hussein.
Given the cover provided by the virus, it should surprise no one that Israel is also playing the same game. The Jewish state has been continuing its lethal bombings of Syria, with hardly any notice in the international media.
In a recent missile attack, nine people were killed near the historic city of Palmyra. Three of the dead were Syrians while six others were presumed to be Lebanese Shi’ites supporting the Damascus government.
Israel de facto regards any Shi’ite as an “Iranian” or an “Iranian proxy” and therefore a “terrorist” eligible to be killed on sight.
But the bigger coronavirus story has to do with Israel’s domestic politics. Benjamin Netanyahu and his principle opponent Benny Gantz have come to an agreement to form a national government, ostensibly to deal with the health crisis.
The wily Netanyahu, who will continue to be prime minister in the deal, has thereby retained his power over the government while also putting a halt to bids from the judiciary to try and sentence him on corruption charges.
As part of the deal with Gantz, Netanyahu will have veto power over the naming of the new government’s attorney general and state prosecutor, guaranteeing the appointment of individuals who will dismiss the charges.
And more will be coming, with the acquiescence of Washington. U.S. elections are little more than six months away and Donald Trump clearly believes that he needs the political support of Netanyahu to energize his rabid Christian Zionist supporters, as well as the cash coming from Jewish oligarchs Sheldon Adelson, Bernard Marcus and Paul Singer.
So, it is time to establish a quid pro quo, which will be Israeli government behind the scenes approaches to powerful and wealthy American Jews on behalf of Trump while the White House will look the other way while Israel annexes most of the remaining Palestinian West Bank.
Pompeo has welcomed the new Israeli government and has confirmed that the annexation of the Palestinian land will be “ultimately Israel’s decision to make,” which amounts to a green light for Netanyahu to go ahead.
A vote on West Bank annexation will reportedly be taken by the Knesset at the beginning of July followed immediately by steps to incorporate Jewish settlements into Israel proper.
According to the Israeli liberal newspaper Haaretz, the planned annexation has raised some concerns among a few liberal American Jewish organizations because it will convince many progressives in the U.S. that Israel has truly become an apartheid state.
J Street warned that annexation “would severely imperil Israel’s future as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people, along with the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship” and has even suggested cutting U.S. aid if that step is actually taken.
Most other ostensibly liberal groups have adopted the usual Zionist two-step, i.e. condemning the move but not advocating any effective steps to prevent it.
And it should also be noted that the largest and most powerful Jewish organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) have not raised any objections at all.
Unaffiliated individual liberal Jews, to include those who consider themselves Zionists, have generally been concerned about the move, though their argument is quite hypocritical, based on their belief that annexation would pari passu destroy any possible two-state solution, damaging both Palestinian rights and “Jewish democracy.”
Some have even welcomed the change, noting that it would create a single state de facto which eventually would have to evolve into a modern democracy with equal rights for all. Such thinking is, however, nonsense.
Israel under Netanyahu and whichever fascist retread that eventually succeeds him regards itself as a Jewish state and will do whatever it takes to maintain that, even including dispossessing remaining Arabs of their land and possessions, stripping them of their legal status, and forcing them to leave as refugees.
That is something that might be referred to as ethnic cleansing, or even genocide.
And those Americans of conscience who are hoping for some change if someone named Joe Biden defeats Trump can also forget about that option. Biden has told the New York Times that “I believe a two-state solution remains the only way to ensure Israel’s long-term security while sustaining its Jewish and democratic identity.
It is also the only way to ensure Palestinian dignity and their legitimate interest in national self-determination.
And it is a necessary condition to take full advantage of the opening that exists for greater cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors. For all these reasons, encouraging a two-state solution remains in the critical interest of the United States.”
Unfortunately, someone should tell Joe that that particular train has already left the station due to the expansion of the Jewish state’s settlements.
Nice words from the man who would be president aside, Biden is bound to the Israel Lobby for its political support and the money it provides as tightly as can be and he will fold before AIPAC and company like a cheap suit.
He has famously declared that “You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist – I am a Zionist” and “My Name is Joe Biden, and Everybody Knows I Love Israel.”
His vice-presidential candidates’ debate with Sarah Palin in 2008 turned embarrassing when he and Palin both engaged in long soliloquys about how much they cherish Israel. Indeed they do.
These heathen jews believe they are above the law. And it’s true!
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu compared the decision by the International Criminal Court chief prosecutor to investigate possible war crimes in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, to the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus IV, calling the ICC decision anti-Semitic.
“We light candles in protest of historic and modern anti-Semitic decrees,” said Netanyahu at a Hanukkah candle-lighting ceremony at the Western Wall in Jerusalem.
“Just like we fought against anti-Semitic decrees 2,000 years ago, we have now learned of new decrees against the Jewish people brought by the International Criminal Court, that told us we have no right to live here,” Netanyahu said and vowed, “we will not bow our heads, we will fight with every means at our disposal.”
An inter-ministerial team set up to deal with the ICC crisis met in the foreign ministry in Jerusalem Sunday, and included representatives of the National Security Council, justice and foreign ministries and the IDF.
Earlier on Sunday, the cabinet heard from Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit about the ICC decision and its ramifications.
The cabinet then approved Netanyahu’s request to prohibit the disclosure and publication of all debates involving the ICC announcement last week, and that all further debates will be held within the Security Cabinet.
This is the power even the US presidents couldn’t put their finger on, but they knew it was there.
Jerusalem is not expected to cooperate directly with the ICC but will likely allow Israelis in a non-official capacity to appear before the court and argue the question of ICC’s authority over Israel since it has never ratified the Rome convention.
They will also question the Palestinians’ standing as they are not a state and should not be allowed to appeal to the court.
There is some debate among legal experts in Israel about the possibility of persuading the three-judge panel to reject Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s recommendation after it rejected an earlier bid by the same prosecutor to investigate American war crimes in Afghanistan.
U.S. President Donald Trump had threatened to sanction the ICC if such an investigation is sanctioned.
Israel intends to enlist the assistance of other countries including the U.S., Britain, Russia, and Australia who share some of the same concerns Jerusalem has over the precedence of an inquiry into a western democracy with a viable legal system.
At the weekly cabinet meeting Sunday, Netanyahu said “While we are moving forward in new areas of hope and peace with our Arab neighbors, the ICC in The Hague has taken a step backward, it finally became a weapon in the political war against the State of Israel,” said the prime minister. “The prosecutor’s decision against Israel is absurd.”
“Who are they accusing here?” the prime minister asked, “Iran? Turkey? Syria? No – Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East [That’s lunacy] . This is terrible hypocrisy.”
Baloney about the 2-state solution. Everybody knows that was never happening, but I like Russia calling out “israel” on the annexation. I don’t recall Russia raising a voice when it comes to Palestine matters… or so few that I missed it. Anyway, in the long run, “israel” will be exterminated one way or another because it does not deserve to exist, and it will not be worthwhile to preserve it.
All settlements are illegal under international law.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 of 2016 states that Israel’s settlement activity constitutes a “flagrant violation” of international law and has “no legal validity”. It demands that Israel stop such activity and fulfill its obligations as an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Russia has confirmed its rejection of Israel’s plans to annex parts of the occupied West Bank, stressing that this would undermine the settlement of the conflict on the basis of a two-state solution, and especially the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in a statement yesterday that Moscow and other countries that support the two-state solution share Palestinian concerns that the implementation of these plans may undermine the prospects of the establishment of an independent, viable and integrated Palestinian state.
The National Office for the Defence of Land and Resistance of Settlement in Palestine has warned that Israeli occupation authorities continue to implement their plans to annex settlements in the occupied West Bank, including in Jerusalem, and take preliminary steps to extend the occupation’s sovereignty over the Jordan Valley and the area to the north of the Dead Sea.
According to the data of the Negotiations Affairs Department of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), approximately 51.6 per cent of the occupied West Bank is under Israeli control.
There were more than 150 settlements and 128 illegal outposts in the occupied West Bank at the end of 2019 in addition to 15 illegal settlements in occupied East Jerusalem. They were home to 670,000 settlers.
All settlements are illegal under international law.
Israel’s main concern is the ability to conceal itself. Its exposure weakens it. Once exposed, Israel faces questions about its legitimacy, its methods, its purposes. Israel does not want to be held accountable. It wants absolute freedom to reproduce itself and amass power. pic.twitter.com/tcjMhpfLQb
Since plenty of years the U.S. is de facto run by pro-Israeli Jews either directly, or indirectly through the might of their Jewish lobbies. The Israeli paper Ma’ariv (02.09.1994) even wrote:
“The U.S. has no longer a government of Goyim [Gentiles], but an administration in which the Jews are full partners in the decision making at all levels. Perhaps the aspects of the Jewish religious law connected with the term ‘government of goyim’ should be re-examined, since it is an outdated term in the U.S.”
The powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) tried to convince Americans that a humanitarian Congress member, Betty McCollum of Minnesota, is ‘worse than ISIS’ because of her bill to protect Palestinian children. AIPAC officials have been investigated for espionage on behalf of Israel. It has long advocated for the Israeli government… Claims to represent all Jewish Americans but today represents only a tiny minority…
“In reality, they are not independent of the israeli government.”
REP. BETTY MCCOLLUM (D-MN) called the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) a “hate group” after it placed ads on Facebook which implied that McCollum and other members of Congress who had defended the rights of Palestinians were worse than the terrorist group ISIS.
McCollum declared: “as a member of Congress and the vice-chair of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I believe defending human rights and freedom are foundational to international security and our democracy.
The struggle to promote human dignity inevitably results in confronting entrenched forces determined to dehumanize, debase and demonize individuals or even entire populations to maintain dominance and an unjust status quo. Hate is used as a weapon to incite and silence dissent.
In explaining why he was not attending this year’s AIPAC conference, Sen. Bernie Sanders declared: “The Israeli people have the right to live in peace and security. So do the Palestinian people.
I am concerned about the platform AIPAC provides for leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic Palestinian rights.”
In a column headlined, “AIPAC Makes Sanders’ Point for Him,” Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank writes: “AIPAC and Netanyahu seemed intent on proving Sanders’ point.
As the conference opened…Netanyahu, speaking to the group via satellite…derided the Palestinians as ‘the pampered children of the international community.’
The AIPAC audience applauded….Netanyahu told AIPAC he was moving forward with plans to annex Palestinian territory—-a move that would make the long sought two-state solution all but impossible.”
In what many considered a direct effort to influence the American presidential election, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon declared: “We don’t want Sanders at AIPAC.
We don’t want him in Israel. Anyone who calls our prime minister a racist is either a liar, an ignorant fool, or both.”
In Milbank’s view, “AIPAC…finds itself not only at odds with Democrats, but also with most American Jews, instead of its tradition of representing strong, broad support for Israel, AIPAC is becoming about as bipartisan as the National Rifle Association.
Even Netanyahu reportedly regards AIPAC as just another right-wing American interest group.
‘We don’t need AIPAC anymore,’ Netanyahu reportedly told one of his advisers. ‘We have enough support in the United States from the evangelicals.
israel depends on the loons for support
I’d happily give up on AIPAC if we didn’t need to counteract J Street,’ a liberal pro-Israel group.
Writing in The Forward, Batya Ungar-Sargon, in an article titled, “How AIPAC Proved Bernie Right,” notes, “I had never before been in the same room as a person who has defended genocide…until the AIPAC policy conference.
Words like apartheid and genocide and ethnic cleansing are often thrown around in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…
But it wasn’t a defender of Israeli war crimes, real or imagined, who was hosted by AIPAC. It was someone from a different context entirely.
“In July of 1995, 8,000 Muslims were murdered in Srebrenica in what the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia deemed a genocide.
Under the command of Ratko Mladić, a Serbian paramilitary unit killed thousands and thousands…Aleksander Vučić was then serving as Minister of Information. He imposed fines for journalists who opposed the government and banned foreign TV networks.
The Serbian media he oversaw was accused of justifying atrocities and demonizing ethnic minorities….Vučić has reinvented himself…and has been serving as president of Serbia since 2017…AIPAC welcomed the Serbian President to address its 18,000 delegates.”
Over the years there have been frequent calls for AIPAC to register as a foreign agent. In the 1970s, Sen. J. William Fulbright (D-AR), then chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, argued that this should be done, as have other U.S. foreign policy and intelligence analysts.
In April 2005, AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were fired from AIPAC amid an FBI investigation into whether they passed classified international security information to Israel.
They were later indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified information to Israel. AIPAC agreed to pay the legal fees for Weissman’s defense through appeal if necessary, but charges were ultimately dropped.
In May 2005, the Justice Department announced that Lawrence Franklin, a U.S. Air Force Reserve Colonel working as a Department of Defense analyst in the Pentagon, had been arrested and charged by the FBI with providing classified international defense information to Israel.
The 6-count criminal complaint identified AIPAC by name. Franklin pleaded guilty to turning over classified material to both AIPAC and an Israeli government official.
He was sentenced to almost three years in prison.
Respected Jewish commentator Peter Beinart said of AIPAC, “In reality, they are not independent of the Israeli government.
The Zionists are leading a war of terrorism against their opponents, using organisations such as Mossad, Betar-Tagar, the Jewish Defense League, and the Anti-Defamation League.
When Netanyahu came out against the Iran deal, AIPAC did not have an independent choice of whether it was going to or not. It pretty much has to kowtow to the Israeli government all the time.”
According to journalist Connie Bruck, AIPAC has been able to “deliver the support of Congress” to prevent any president who wants to negotiate with Israel from using the multi-billion dollar packages of military aid that go to Israel each year as leverage for passing the spending and taking away this strongest negotiating chit.
AIPAC has helped to make Israel the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since the end of World War ll. It now receives more than $3.8 billion in aid yearly.
As a result of AIPAC’s efforts, this aid includes numerous provisions that are not available to other American allies.
According to the Congressional Research Service, these provisions include providing aid “as all grant cash transfers, not designated for particular projects, and transferred as a lump sum in the first month of the fiscal year, instead of in installments.
Israel is allowed to spend about a quarter of the military aid for the procurement in Israel of defense articles and services…rather than in the U.S.”
An important reason for AIPAC’s influence is that it markets itself as representing American Jewish opinion. In fact, most American Jews disagree with its embrace of total support for Israel as its governments steadily move away from democracy.
A recent Pew Center poll showed that only 38 percent of American Jews believe that the Israeli government is seriously pursuing peace, while 44 percent believe that the continued construction of settlements in the occupied territories damages Israel’s national security.
Increasingly, young Jewish activists are separating themselves from AIPAC. In March the Washington Post reported, “…the activists represent a new generation of Israel critics that differs with the pro-peace movement of the 1990s.
That earlier movement focused on a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict…The new groups are the product of the post-millennial liberal politics, with antipathy for nationalism of all kinds and a hunger to tear down the entire system of money in politics.”
Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of J Street, which formed in 2007 as a liberal but still pro-Zionist alternative to AIPAC, declares: “What we said was: ‘There’s another way to be pro-Israel, you don’t have to support whatever the Israeli government does.’”
According to the Washington Post, “Younger groups are saying: ‘You don’t have to be pro-Israel, you should be pro-human rights, and everyone should have a state.’”
“When a Jew, in America or in South Africa, talks to his Jewish companions about ‘our’ government, he means the government of Israel.”
– David Ben-Gurion, Israeli Prime Minister
This year’s anti-AIPAC campaign was led by the Jewish group IfNotNow. A few days after members of IfNotNow videotaped themselves confronting former Vice President Joe Biden about AIPAC’s opposition to the 2015 U.S.-Iran nuclear deal, Biden said he would go to the conference “to convince them to change their position.”
In the end, Biden sent a video message, telling delegates that Israel’s annexation plans and settlement activities were “choking hopes for peace.”
The idea that supporting the Israeli government’s policies is the way to attract Jewish voters has no basis in reality.
J Street recently asked Jewish voters to name their two most important issues. Just 4 percent chose Israel. The same survey found that 65 percent said they were somewhat or very attached to Israel. The American Jewish Committee’s 2015 poll found a similar result.
The views of most American Jews were never represented by AIPAC and at the present time, AIPAC speaks only for a small minority, which embraces the occupation and the Israeli government itself. It may have become what many, such as Rep. McCollum, call it, “a hate group.”
That it should register as a foreign agent of the government of Israel is increasingly clear. We should not permit it to pretend that it, in any way, speaks for millions of American Jews whose opinions are far different and who embrace human rights and equality for men and women of every nation and faith, in particular the Palestinians.
Despite thousands of Americans out of work and tens of millions impacted by coronavirus cutbacks, experts expect that Israel will get its full massive aid package. Administration official says Israelis don’t have to worry “even if there is a depression”… and even though the aid is damaging to Americans…
By Alison Weir
The Jerusalem Post reports, a “Trump administration source” said that Israel would not need to worry about getting the money “even if there is a depression” in the U.S.
Israel’s Jerusalem Post newspaper reports that “nearly all the experts” it consulted believe that Israel will get at least $3.8 billion from the U.S. in the coming year despite economic devastation to the U.S. economy caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
JP notes that the aid is expected even though “American economic activity has declined in recent weeks at a rate not seen since the Great Depression.” Barron’s similarly reports that the entire U.S. economy “has been brutalized” by the coronavirus pandemic.
“Whatever happens next, the events of the past six weeks will scar the U.S. economy well into the 2030s, if not beyond,” Barron’s predicts. “Tens of millions of Americans are already paying the price, and they will continue to do so for a long time.”
Nevertheless, the Jerusalem Post reports, a “Trump administration source” said that Israel would not need to worry about getting the money “even if there is a depression” in the U.S.
For decades Israel has received more U.S. tax money than any other country – on average, about 7,000 times more per capita than to others around the world.
$38 billion package
The current aid to Israel is part of a package promised by the Obama administration in 2016 under which Israel would get $38 billion over the next 10 years – the largest such package in U.S. history.
The aid package works out to $7,230 per minute to Israel, and equals about $23,000 per each Jewish Israeli family of four.
Under the Obama-Netanyahu Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the $3.8 billion per year was to be a ‘ceiling’ – the agreement was that Israel would not ask for more money on top of this annual disbursement.
However, an MOU is a non-binding agreement and can be changed. Therefore, Israel partisans in Congress have introduced legislation that would make it into law – and the legislation before Congress makes the terms even more beneficial to Israel than the MOU.
Under the current bill before Congress, the $38 billion would be a ‘floor’ rather than a ‘ceiling,’ meaning that aid could increase, as it almost always has in the past.
JP reports, however, that some former Israeli diplomats, concerned that Americans suffering under COVID-19 might object, recommend that this year Israel avoid its usual request for more money.
“With an on-the-ground presence, we can more effectively serve Israeli clients looking for global solutions”
Aid to Israel hurts U.S.
Israel and its partisans claim that U.S. aid to Israel is supposedly good for the U.S. because Israel spends most of the aid money on U.S. weaponry. (All other nations that receive U.S. military aid are required to spend 100 percent of it on U.S. equipment.).
However, if the U.S. wishes to subsidize U.S. companies, the Pentagon and/or other U.S. agencies could simply buy more equipment themselves, and let Israelis use their own money to purchase weaponry.
Similarly, Israel and its advocates often claim that Israel is America’s “aircraft carrier” in the Middle East. However, it is actually American soldiers who have fought and died for Israel through the years.
Aid to Israel is also problematic for other reasons. Israel has a long record of human rights violations, as documented by Human Rights Watch, the Red Cross, Christian Aid, Amnesty International, Oxfam, and numerous other humanitarian agencies.
For these reasons, providing Israel with massive amounts of money and weaponry is antithetical to most Americans’ moral and ethical principles.
In addition, such aid creates dangerous hostility to the U.S. Bin Laden, for example, listed U.S. support for Israeli crimes as one of the major reasons for his opposition to the United States.
“How is it right for you to occupy our countries and kill our women and children and expect to live in peace and security? … the equation is clear: you are killed as you kill and abducted as you abduct” –Full text: bin Laden’s ‘letter to America’
Trump was going to be ‘neutral’ on Israel-Palestine
Aid to Israel is largely driven by the powerful and pervasive pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., which influences both major parties.
In 2016, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton attacked opponent Donald Trump for being insufficiently pro-Israel. The New York Timesreported on March 21, 2016:
Mr. Trump has said in recent weeks that he would be “neutral” when it came to negotiating a peace accord between Israelis and Palestinians… his blunt language rattled some Israelis, who worry that it might mean a less supportive United States.
Mrs. Clinton wasted no time in seizing on those fears. Her speech was a thunderous affirmation of American solidarity with Israel, with promises to buttress Israel’s military, combat anti-Semitism, police Iran on its nuclear program, crack down on Iranian proxies like Hezbollah, and thwart efforts to boycott Israeli products.”
Hillary Clinton suggested in a television interview in Israel, broadcast on Thursday, that the Islamic State is “rooting for Donald Trump’s victory” and that terrorists are praying, “Please, Allah, make Trump president of America.”
As Trump came under increasing attack through the years from the Democratic establishment, his policies eventually changed. Today, megadonor Sheldon Adelson is widely credited with driving Trump’s Mideast policies. (Adelson once said that he regretted serving in the U.S. Army instead of the Israeli military.)
Israeli media report that there is an additional way that Israelis will likely obtain money from the U.S. during the COVID-19 crisis. Israel’s leading financial daily reports: “Israeli Companies Can Cash In On $10 Million Check from Trump.”
According to the Israeli website, CTech, Israeli companies are eligible for money from the U.S. business aid program: “Any company that has operations in the U.S. and employs workers there can apply under the $2 trillion CARES Business Assistance Program that was passed at the end of March. The company does not have to be registered as an American company but only has to have a U.S. subsidiary that pays salaries to U.S. employees.”
The loans, based on U.S. government collateral, are given at a 1% interest rate and don’t have to be repaid for two years, with a six month grace period – if the companies are even required to pay them back. There is a strong chance that many of the loans will turn into grants.
Will U.S. media report on this?
At a time when more and more Americans are out of work, and almost everyone else is facing cutbacks, giving Israel its full $3.8 billion package may cause concern.
However, given that U.S. media often fail to report on U.S. aid to Israel, the money may sneak through, once again, with most Americans having no idea how much of their tax money was just given away.
“the Israeli government presented no evidence that rock-throwing and other violence by some demonstrators seriously threatened Israeli soldiers across the border fence.”
The New York Times claims that, until the demonstrations began in Gaza last month, Hamas had been firing “a fairly steady tempo” of rockets at Israel. In fact, it had been firing none.
On March 30, fourteen peaceful demonstrators were killed and hundreds wounded when Israeli soldiers fired across the border fence at unarmed Palestinians in Gaza.
The day of the crime, New York Times reported that, although the protests were “billed as the start of a peaceful, six-week sit-in”, Palestinian protesters had “quickly turned violent”.
The Times added, “But as some began hurling stones, tossing Molotov cocktails and rolling burning tires at the fence, the Israelis responded with tear gas and gunfire.”
Three days later, the editorial board of the Times acknowledged that the claim that Palestinians were “hurling stones, tossing Molotov cocktails and rolling burning tires at the fence” was the “Israeli version of events”.
In other words, the Times tacitly acknowledged that it had presented the Israeli propaganda version — in which the violence was instigated by the Palestinians — as though truthful.
By contrast, as Human Rights Watch noted, “the Israeli government presented no evidence that rock-throwing and other violence by some demonstrators seriously threatened Israeli soldiers across the border fence.”
Rather, “The high number of deaths and injuries was the foreseeable consequence of granting soldiers leeway to use lethal force outside of life-threatening situations in violation of international norms, coupled with the longstanding culture of impunity within the Israeli army for serious abuses.”
The Times hasn’t been faring any better with its reporting on Gaza since. In fact, it gets worse.
In an article published as “News Analysis” on April 15, David M. Halbfinger wrote in the Times about Hamas’s attitude toward such non-violent resistance.
To its rockets Israel had responded with the Iron Dome antimissile system. To its tunnels Israel was answering with a $2 billion reinforced-concrete wall buried deep underground.
And on Sunday, Israel said it had uncovered and destroyed the longest operational tunnel yet from Gaza.
It was no surprise, then, that after a grass-roots idea for a peaceful, long-lasting protest along the Gaza fence started gaining widespread support, Hamas brought a halt to what had been a fairly steady tempo of rocket launches into Israel and threw its considerable organizational might behind the demonstrations.
That is a lie.
Hamas had not been routinely launching rockets into Israel until the protests began.
Hamas had not been firing rockets into Israel at all.
Not in the days prior. Not in the weeks prior. Not in the months prior. Not even in the years prior.
According to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), 25 rockets fired from Gaza struck Israel in 2015, and 15 rockets in 2016. The IDF itself identified none of those rockets as having been fired by Hamas.
In 2017, according to the IDF, 35 rockets and mortars were fired at Israel from Gaza. Most of them, about 30, had been fired in the very last month of the year, after US President Donald Trump on December 6 said Jerusalem was Israel’s capital (even though East Jerusalem is under international law “occupied Palestinian territory”, and for the US to move its embassy there would be illegal).
About half of them landed inside Gaza.
The IDF also acknowledged that these rockets were not being fired by Hamas. Rather, as the Israeli daily Haaretz reported, the IDF attributed the attacks to “the desire by Islamic Jihad and other Salafi organizations to thwart the planned reconciliation between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas”, as well as Islamic Jihad’s “desire to avenge Israels destruction of a cross-border attack tunnel in October that killed 12 of the organizations operatives.”
The Zionist regime presents no evidence to back most of it’s claims. The world is to rely solely on it’s say so.
See, Hamas has actually long been trying to suppress the very rocket attacks the New York Times would have you believe it was responsible for routinely until the Gaza protests. Hamas and the Salafi groups firing these rockets are actually at odds with each other.
Of course, Israel holds Hamas responsible for any rocket attacks — even though it knows that Hamas isn’t the one doing it.
This has been the situation for quite a long time. Every serious observer knows this. Halbfinger is the Times‘ Jerusalem Bureau Chief. He cannot not know this.
Data for this year isn’t so easily obtained. But according to the list compiled at Wikipedia, there were six rockets fired in January and five or more in February.
Pointing out the low number of rocket attacks is not to trivialize their seriousness. Indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli civilian population centers are a war crime. T
he point is that the Times‘ claim that there had been “a fairly steady tempo” of rocket attacks until the Gaza protests started last month is at best misleading. And the Times‘ insinuation that rockets that have been fired were fired by Hamas is also maliciously false.
I would challenge Kaplow even to support his implication that Hamas fourteen months ago was responsible for firing rockets at Israel; but regardless, it puts the lie to the Times‘claim that Hamas had been steadily raining down rockets on Israel until the demonstrations began last month.
The falseness of the Times‘ claim also goes to the broader propaganda purpose of the article.
What the Times won’t tell you is that, actually, it is Israel that has routinely violated its ceasefire agreements with Hamas — including the ceasefires in place prior to its major operations “Cast Lead” (2008-2009), “Pillar of Defense” (2012), and “Protective Edge” (2014).
Hamas has also since 2005 expressed its acceptance of a Palestinian state alongside Israel within the 1949 armistice lines (a.k.a. the 1967 lines or “Green Line”).
And there is a great deal more about Hamas, and the Israel-Palestine conflict in general, that the Times does not disclose to its readers.
“The United States waged biological warfare against its own Congress in 2001 with the anthrax component of the 9/11 anthrax false flag operation, which terrorized Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, the leaders of the movement that blocked the Patriot Act, into giving up and allowing the Patriot Act.
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor.”… “And advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.” The Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses (September 2000)
I spent most of 2004 through 2006 blaming Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld for 9/11. As you can imagine, I got plenty of pushback.
Strangely, the loudest, most hysterical shrieks came not from red-white-and-blue Republican patriots, but from seemingly insane Zionists screaming: “Why do you hate the Jews so much, you anti-Semite?”
At first, I could not for the life of me figure out why blaming two non-Jews, Cheney and Rumsfeld, elicited that kind of reaction.
It also seemed odd that anyone talking about the explosive demolitions of World Trade Center Towers 1, 2, and 7 was reviled as a Jew-hater.
Questioning what happened to the Pentagon, whether there were really any hijackers or cell phone calls, who really sent the anthrax, who bought the put options, who exhibited foreknowledge, and so on elicited the same hysterical reaction from Israel-firsters.
It was only after I looked into the ethnic and foreign-loyalist backgrounds of PNAC, Larry Silverstein, and other 9/11 suspects that it began to dawn on me that “the Zionist doth protest too much.”
We are now experiencing 911-2B, the coronavirus black swan. Just as 9/11 terrorized, shocked, and shut down the USA for a few days, it seems that Covid-19 will do the same, only more so.
Instead of a few days, we may be shut down for a few months, maybe even a few years. And once again, Zionists are hysterically pushing back against those of us questioning the official story.
Press TV, meanwhile, published an article by American conspiracy theorist Kevin Barrett to back the claim that the coronavirus is a US-Israeli conspiracy using biological warfare to hurt Iran.
“US, Israel waging biological warfare on massive scale,” was the March 7 story’s headline.
Barrett, a “9/11 truther,” got crazier in the story:
“The United States waged biological warfare against its own Congress in 2001 with the anthrax component of the 9/11 anthrax false flag operation, which terrorized Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, the leaders of the movement that blocked the Patriot Act, into giving up and allowing the Patriot Act.
“So the United States is run by lunatics, by psychopaths who are entirely capable of launching World War 3 by way of a biological warfare attack on China and Iran, with the Iran component presumably led by Israel. That’s the most likely explanation for what we’re seeing.”
This is the kind of rot Press TV publishes.
The Algemeiner also vilified Muslims reacting negatively to Israel’s announcement that it would have a coronavirus vaccine ready “in a few weeks.”
It cited British, Iranian, and Algerian Muslims balking at the prospect of buying vaccines from Israel, and/or questioning how Israel could possibly develop a vaccine for a new rogue virus in such short order, assuming it hadn’t simultaneously developed both the virus and the vaccine.
Might Israel profit from a disastrous black swan that it helped create? It already happened once.
Prior to 9/11, the Jewish population of Israel was fleeing, with net emigration outpacing net immigration, while the dotcom bust and suicide bombings collapsed the Jewish State’s economy.
The global Islamic movement was picking up steam; it seemed likely that Muslims might soon win back custody of their holy places.
(Muslims have administered the holy sites in and around Jerusalem/al-Quds virtually ever since Islam existed, minus a couple of brief and bloody crusader interludes, until the current Zionist genocide began less than a century ago.)
During the run-up to 9/11, as Naomi Klein explains in The Shock Doctrine, Israel put all its chips into anti-terror start-ups—and hit the jackpot on 9/11/2001.
An anti-Islam propaganda tidal wave swept the globe, washing away the Islamic Awakening surge and leaving in its place the 27-million-Muslim holocaust that continues today.
The 9/11 black swan was in essence a propaganda operation designed to demonize Islam and Muslims in general, and anti-Zionists ones in particular, in service to changing the arc of history to benefit Israel.
But it was sold by PNAC crypto-Zionists to people like Cheney and Rumsfeld as a recipe for prolonging US empire for a New American Century by way of a “New Pearl Harbor.”
Today’s coronavirus black swan, like 9/11, has all the characteristics of a trauma-based mass-mind-control op.
It has already been used to demonize China in the same way 9/11 was used to demonize Islam: Just as we were supposed to hate the crazy suicidal Muslims yearning for harems of afterlife virgins, we are now supposed to feel disgust for Chinese slurpers of bat soup.
And just as we were supposed to loathe the brutal and incompetent governments of Muslim-majority nations, now we are told to revile the oppressive censorship-addicted regime in Beijing.
It may be purely coincidental that this wholesale demonization of the world’s two greatest classical civilizations, based on two fear-inciting black swan events of suspicious origin, just happened to arrive in the wake of the Bernard Lewis-Samuel Huntington pronouncement that the 21st century would be era of the “clash of civilizations.” After all, even the craziest coincidence theories sometimes turn out to be true.
It may be a coincidence that at the same time those “athletes” were in Wuhan, the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Johnson & Johnson, and other Establishment titans were hosting a pandemic simulation called Event 201.
The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.
It may be purely coincidental that the virus appeared in Wuhan, home of China’s biggest biodefense laboratory, and China’s biggest transportation hub, just in time for the Chinese New Year, when most Chinese travel to visit relatives.
Likewise, it could be coincidental that the real-life Covid-19 pandemic almost perfectly mimics Lockstep, the Rockefeller Foundation’s recipe for a global police state emerging on the back of a coronavirus-style pandemic.
Then again, it could be that the Chinese government’s suspicions about the US, or others’ suspicions about Israel (especially regarding the coronavirus catastrophe in Iran) are justified.
But such possibilities are far outside of the mainstream media’s Overton Window. The whole topic of bioweapons in relation to coronavirus is an MSM no-go zone, just as the evidence and arguments refuting the official story was a no-go zone after 9/11.
The very fact that such things are unspeakable in the Mockingbird media suggests that yet another nefarious propaganda operation is underway.
Just as I came to reject the official story of 9/11 by comparing the arguments and evidence cited by proponents and opponents of that thesis, I am currently leaning toward the “Anglo-Zionist bioweapon” interpretation of coronavirus based on what I’ve seen so far by opponents as well as proponents.
I recently listened to Peter Myers’ arguments that Covid-19 was made in a lab—”most likely from Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).” (Read his sources here.)
Myers focuses on a paper trail documenting bat virus research at Wuhan and the University of North Carolina, allegations of Chinese germ warfare espionage, and so forth. While his scenario, an accidental release from WIV, is not impossible, the evidence he cites is also compatible with the deliberate fabrication of a second-level cover story that would be deployed if the first-level legend, “Covid-19 spontaneously jumped from bats to humans,” is conclusively disproven.
The same second-level cover story would in the meantime function as a “blame the Chinese” conspiracy theory pushed by Steve Bannon, Tom Cotton, and other neocon and anti-China sources.
The question of whether the virus is naturally evolved or man-made is still open. Mainstream authorities like Nature Magazine are, quite naturally, pushing the “naturally evolved” position as hard as they can…which they would be expected to do whether or not it was true.
As with 9/11, the scientific evidence on coronavirus may give rise to a long-running debate. Meanwhile the world moves on.
With 2020 hindsight I can now see that I should have interpreted 9/11 as a likely false flag immediately, based on cui bono. Today, asking the same question about coronavirus, “who benefits,” yields only slightly less obvious results.
But if Covid-19 was a biological attack on China, China’s number one European partner Italy, and China’s close Middle Eastern friend (and Anglo-Zionist arch-enemy) Iran, why is it spreading elsewhere? A skeptic on Pepe Escobar’s email list recently responded: “Hi Pepe, I’m convinced the facts do not support your theory.
The damage to the West is greater than to China and it would be suicidal for US to engineer this. Why rule out natural causes like the Spanish flu?”
It is true that most military strategists dislike bioweapons due to their massive blowback potential: There is no guarantee that a mutating virus will stick to the race or geographical area you are attacking.
Though Covid-19 hit China first, under highly suspicious circumstances, making it “the Chinese virus” in the words of Donald Trump (and, subliminally, in MSM reporting and global public opinion) it is now cratering the US and European economies.
Could any US biowar team, however “rogue”—much less the commanding heights of the National Security State—have been crazy enough to risk that kind of blowback?
They were certainly crazy enough in 2001. Covid-19 is the new 9/11, the new “Transformative Event,” the new “watershed event in American history.
It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America’s fundamental sense of security…Like Pearl Harbor, this event would divide our past and future into a before and an after.
The United States might respond with draconian measures, scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and use of deadly force.”
That sounds, to most of us, like an unpleasant prospect. Yet one of the authors of “Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger,” Philip Zelikow, is a leading suspect in the orchestration of 9/11, which occurred less than three years after that article was published.
Cover-up czar Zelikow, essentially the sole author of the risible work of fiction known as The 9/11 Commission Report, might conceivably have viewed the massage damage to the United States—not just the loss of the condemned-for-asbestos Trade Towers and a few thousand replaceable people, but also the hemorrhage of more than $6 trillion dollars alongside the even greater reputational loss in the 9/11-triggered “forever wars”—as being “worth it,” in the same way Madeleine Albright famously said that murdering half a million Iraqi children was “worth it.”
Might the neocon crazies who thought 9/11 was worth it feel the same way about a coronavirus biowar strike? They might. As Pepe Escobar suggested, the Covid-19
Transformative Event is acting as a “global circuit breaker.”
His conclusion: “What’s certain is that the whole global economy has been hit by an insidious, literally invisible circuit breaker. This may be just a ‘coincidence.’ Or this may be, as some are boldly arguing, part of a possible, massive psy-op creating the perfect geopolitical and social engineering environment for full-spectrum dominance.”
How could a circuit-breaker foster full-spectrum dominance? First, the neocons recognize that China’s inexorable rise to #1 world power status, and the concomitant collapse of the Anglo-Zionist Empire, is pretty much a done deal absent some circuit-breaking black swan event.
Just as the Zionists needed the 9/11 black swan to get their “Clean Break” with a historical trajectory leading towards the end of the apartheid Jewish State, so too the Anglo-Zionists might realize that something equally “transformative” would be required to forestall the rise of China.
The US cannot win a trade war with China. It cannot win a nuclear war. It cannot win a conventional land war.
Yet from the neocon perspective it needs some kind of war ASAP before China grows too strong.
So if you were a hardline neocon strategist dedicated to stymieing China at all costs, you might opt for a stealth 5G warfare approach featuring deniable biowar strikes among other tactics. You might be stupid or crazy enough not to consider the possibility of blowback.
But more likely you would welcome the blowback as an opportunity to tear down the current US economy, which is totally dependent on Chinese imports, and rebuild a new, more Spartan system geared for a long 5G war on China (and Russia and Iran and Venezuela and anybody else who won’t follow your orders).
Strategic analysts agree that the necessary prelude to ramped up US-vs.-China warfare would be a decoupling of the US and Chinese economies.
That decoupling is happening now, thanks to coronavirus. Once it has passed the point of no return, war becomes far more likely.
Hunkering down for a serious war on China and its allies would also require a momentous psychological and cultural shift on the part of the American people.
Until now, they have been lazy, undisciplined, addicted to consumption without much production, and unwilling to sacrifice themselves (though quite willing to murder foreigners from the safe distance of a drone base).
Only a profound psychic shock, and some serious deprivation, could retool them as potential soldiers and total war participants in a deadly and dangerous struggle to maintain their rulers’ global dominance privileges. Or so the neocons might imagine.
Will the panicked American sheeple, stampeded toward the toilet paper aisles by Coronavirus 911-2B, be redirected into a hyper-militarized mode of life befitting a long war for full spectrum dominance?
Will the Great Coronavirus Depression end in World War III just as the first Great Depression ended in World War II, with military Keynesianism once again “rescuing” a dead-in-the-water economy? Will 9/11 and the 9/11 wars seem like small potatoes once we’ve seen the Coronavirus Wars?
 From 2006 through around 2011 my 9/11 truth focused Wikipedia page was defaced by false accusations, sourced to an anonymous blog, that I was a “supporter of Holocaust deniers.” At the time I knew almost nothing about Holocaust revisionism, and did not even recognize the name of the “Holocaust denier” I was accused of supporting. Over a period of several years, countless attempts to correct the dozens of false statements about me on Wikipedia were made, but the false information would immediately reappear within hours, sometimes within minutes.
 When I brought Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to Madison, Wisconsin, the WORT “alternative” radio interviewer’s first question was “why do you hate the Jews?” Gage was nonplussed. He and his organization focus on scientific evidence of controlled demolition, not the question of who did it.
 “A slew of new start-ups were launched, specializing in everything from ‘search and nail’ data mining, to surveillance cameras, to terrorist profiling. When the market for these services and devices exploded in the years after September 11, the Israeli state openly embraced a new national economic vision: the growth provided by the dot-com bubble would be replaced with a homeland security boom.” (Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine, p.435)
 Chinas Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is poised to end Western dominance of world trade in the same way the European sea route to Asia ended Muslim dominance via the Silk Road 500 years ago. For historical perspective, read Peter Frankopan’s The Silk Roads: A New History of the World.
 “On this perverse (neocon) view of the world, if America fails to achieve her national destiny, and is mired in perpetual war, then all is well. Man’s humanity, defined in terms of struggle to the death, is rescued from extinction… To my mind, this fascistic glorification of death and violence springs from a profound inability to celebrate life, joy, and the sheer thrill of existence.” –Shadia Drury
Canadian firm says it could make 10 million doses per month — if its innovative production method wins FDA approval.
A Canadian company says that it has produced a COVID-19 vaccine just 20 days after receiving the coronavirus’s genetic sequence, using a unique technology that they soon hope to submit for FDA approval.
Medicago CEO Bruce Clark said his company could produce as many as 10 million doses a month. If regulatory hurdles can be cleared, he said in a Thursday interview, the vaccine could start to become available in November 2021.
An Israeli research lab has also claimed to have created a vaccine. But Clark says his company’s technique, which has already been proven effective in producing vaccines for seasonal flu, is more reliable and easier to scale.
“There are a couple of others who are claiming that they have — well, we will call them vaccine[s]” for COVID-19, he said. “But they’re different technologies.
Canadian firm says it could make 10 million doses per month — if its innovative production method wins FDA approval.
Some are RNA– or DNA-based vaccines that have not yet been proven in any indication yet, let alone this one. Hopefully, they’ll be successful.”
How did Clark’s team create one so quickly,? They use plants, not chicken eggs, as a bioreactor for growing vaccine proteins.
Traditional vaccine production requires eggs, a lot of them. Vaccine manufacturers inject the virus into the eggs, where it propagates.
But using eggs is expensive, takes a long time, and is far from perfect. Mutations can yield vaccines that don’t match up to the virus they aim to shut down, Clark said
So Medicago doesn’t work with a live virus. Instead, it uses plants, a relatively new approach that has seen much advancement in the past decade.
It inserts a genetic sequence into agrobacterium, a soil bacteria, which is taken up by plants — in this case, a close cousin to tobacco.
The plant begins to produce the protein that can then be used as a vaccine. If the virus begins to mutate, as is expected for COVID-19, they can just update the production using new plants.
“That’s the difference between us” and egg-based methods, he said, ”we go directly to producing the vaccine or the antibody without having to propagate the virus.”
How, then, does it continue to portray itself as the victim, while painting the actual victims – Palestinians – as the aggressors?
It has become a tired and broken record, one that Israel and its ardent supporters play, regardless of the rationality of their arguments.
Any criticism of Israel, or any peaceful act to put pressure on the state, draws the same outrage, expressed through carefully thought out, yet irrational, talking points.
One soldier is heard to say “Who’s the coward now?” as the dogs tear at the youth’s clothes.
Anyone, or any organization, who dares to criticize the self-proclaimed “only democracy in the Middle East” is accused of being motivated by anti-semitism.
Any critical act or protest aimed at pressing Israel to uphold international law, no matter how peaceful, is denounced.
Israel’s treatment with kid gloves is not new; what is new, however, is its launching of the bullying trigger button within seconds of an attack.
The reality is that the settlement enterprise itself is racist, because homes are only built for Jewish Israelis
While access to the nuclear button is normally reserved for the head of state, any pro-Israel civilian can launch the bullying trigger button, and they are encouraged to do so by Israel.
An army of social media trolls linked to Israeli missions abroad have their fingers hovering over this button, ready to defend as soon as they perceive an attack. It’s a button they have pressed repeatedly in recent days.
Take the case of Airbnb. The holiday property listings company enraged the bullying army by withdrawing listings for properties built in illegal Israeli settlements from its website.
Pro-Israel critics claimed that Airbnb was singling out Jewish Israeli properties, and therefore, this was anti-semitic.
Breaking international law
The first Zionists to establish “Israel” arrived wearing Hitler mustaches.
The reality is that the settlement enterprise itself is racist, because homes are only built for Jewish Israelis.
Imagine the outcry if Britain built homes only for white Christians, banning other inhabitants of Britain from acquiring them.
Settlements are also illegal under international law.
Airbnb said it took action because settlements were at the “core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians”.
A statement from the company noted: “US law permits companies like Airbnb to engage in business in these territories.
At the same time, many in the global community have stated that companies should not do business here because they believe companies should not profit on lands where people have been displaced.”
A reasonable person would see clear logic in that stance. However, the bullying trigger button was pressed, and an illegal settler is now bringing a lawsuit against Airbnb.
Consider that for a moment: an illegal settler is suing a company for a moral and legal act.
It was then the turn of British Quakers to enrage the pro-Israel lobby. Their crime? Divesting from companies that profit from Israel’s illegal occupation.
Paul Parker, recording clerk for Quakers in Britain, said in a statement: “With the occupation now in its 51st year, and with no end in near sight, we believe we have a moral duty to state publicly that we will not invest in any company profiting from the occupation.”
More pressure needed
This time, it was the Board of Deputies of British Jews that pressed the bullying trigger button. In a statement, the board’s president, Marie van der Zyl, condemned the decision: “The appalling decision of the Friends House hierarchy to divest from just one country in the world – the only Jewish state – despite everything else going on around the globe, shows the dangers of the obsessive and tunnel-visioned approach that a narrow clique of church officials have taken in recent years.”
Any reasonable person who knows the Quakers would realize that they would have reflected seriously before making such a decision, and that it was based on their deep knowledge of the situation over decades.
Divesting from companies that profit from an illegal occupation is moral and legal.
Speak if you want to, they say, but the price will be high. The bullying trigger button can be pressed by anyone in defense of Israeli apartheid
Israel does not recognize that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are occupied. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has deemed it absurd to talk of an occupation, and the long-advertised US “deal of the century” will likely reflect this by avoiding a call to end the occupation.
This will certainly not lead to peace. What is needed is more pressure on Israel to comply with international law and to finally end the occupation of Palestinian land.
Airbnb was correct to identify the settlements as a core issue, and it is time that others follow suit.
Israel is a military force planted in Palestine for the Western powers from over a century ago.
Whither free speech?
The bullying trigger button will now be pressed regularly, judging by the number of moves to ban trade with illegal Israeli settlements.
Chile’s congress overwhelmingly passed a resolution demanding that the government “forbid the entry of products manufactured and coming from Israeli colonies in the occupied Palestinian territory”.
This follows hot on the heels of Ireland’s senate passing a bill banning the import of products from illegal Israeli settlements.
The vicious attack on CNN contributor Marc Lamont Hill, fired for standing with Palestinians, shows that Israel is being singled out not for criticism, but rather for protection from accountability.
Israel is shutting down its critics on social media. It happened to me
Free speech, it seems, is a value that most claim to uphold – except those who blindly support Israel. Speak if you want to, they say, but the price will be high. The bullying trigger button can be pressed by anyone in defense of Israeli apartheid.
The Israelis love to muddy the water in order to take the focus away from the fact that they’re not Hebrews (all Hebrews are irrevocably dead) and have no right to the land of Palestine, a country they’ve stolen and destroyed.
The Israelis have been feeding us all a steady diet about this or that country or politician being a “new Hitler’ who will either gas 6M Jews “again”, or wants to wipe Israel “off the map” or even engage in a new Holocaust.
Gilad Atzmon brilliantly calls this mental disorder “pre-traumatic stress disorder”, and he is spot on.
The Israelis mostly used this “preemptive geschrei*” as a way to squeeze out as many concessions (and money) from the western goyim as possible.
But in a deep sense, it is possibly that the Israelis are at least dimly aware that their entire project is simply not viable, that you cannot ensure the survival of any state by terrorizing all of your neighbors.
Violence, especially vicious, rabid, violence can, indeed, terrorize people, but only for so long.
Sooner or later, the human soul will outgrow any fear, no matter how visceral, and will replace that fear by a new and immensely powerful sense of determination.
Here is what Robert Fisk said in distant 2006, 14 years ago: You heard Sharon, before he suffered his massive stroke, he used this phrase in the Knesset, you know, “The Palestinians must feel pain.”
This was during one of the intifadas. The idea that if you continue to beat and beat and beat the Arabs, they will submit, that eventually they’ll go on their knees and give you what you want.
And this is totally, utterly self-delusional, because it doesn’t apply anymore.
It used to apply 30 years ago, when I first arrived in the Middle East. If the Israelis crossed the Lebanese border, the Palestinians jumped in their cars and drove to Beirut and went to the cinema.
Now when the Israelis cross the Lebanese border, the Hezbollah jump in their cars in Beirut and race to the south to join battle with them.
But the key thing now is that Arabs are not afraid any more. Their leaders are afraid, the Mubaraks of this world, the president of Egypt, King Abdullah II of Jordan.
They’re afraid. They shake and tremble in their golden mosques, because they were supported by us. But the people are no longer afraid.
20 years ago this was unheard of. Even Palestine was mostly unheard of!
What was true only for some Arabs in 2006, has now become true for most (maybe even all?) Arabs in 2020.
As for the Iranians, they have never had any fear of Uncle Shmuel, they are the ones who “injected” the newly created Hezbollah with this qualitatively new kind of “special courage” (which is the Shia ethos, really!) when this movement was founded.
Empires can survive many things, but once they are not feared anymore, then their end is near.
The Iranian strike proved a fundamental new reality to the rest of the world: the USA is much more afraid of Iran than Iran is afraid of the USA. U.S. rulers and politicians will, of course, claim otherwise.
But that futile effort to re-shape reality is now doomed to failure, if only because even the Houthis can now openly and successfully defy the combined might of the “Axis of Kindness”.
You can think of U.S. and Israeli leaders as the orchestra on the Titanic: they play well, but they will still get wet and then die.
(*geschrei: the Yiddish word for yelling, crying out, to shriek)
“One of my first reservations about Zionism was and is that, semi consciously at least, it grants the anti-Semite’s first premise about the abnormality of the Jew.”
― Christopher Hitchens
The Abu Kabir Forensic Institute in Tel Aviv, which holds bodies of Palestinians killed in alleged attacks on Israelis, is notoriously known as the place where Palestinian organs and body parts have been harvested.
Israel’s use of “necroviolence” on bodies of Palestinians has been condemned as part of its policy to exert further control over the people living in the occupied territories.
On Sunday, a video (I don’t like to watch it) that went viral on social media showed an Israeli bulldozer violently scooping up the body of a Palestinian who had been shot by Israeli forces east of Khan Younis in the southern Gaza Strip.
Israeli authorities alleged that the man, identified as 27-year-old Mohammed Ali al-Naim – a member of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) movement, was attempting to plant an explosive device near the Israeli fence. (a ready excuse)
The video showed a group of Palestinians running forward with a wheelbarrow to try to carry al-Naim’s body, as well as another man who was wounded, back from the fence but they were also targeted by Israeli soldiers.
At least two men were shot in the legs, according to Gaza’s health ministry.
Muthana al-Najjar, the journalist who shot the video, said the Israeli bulldozer, which was accompanied by a Merkava tank, ran over al-Naim’s body and tried several times to pick it up with its blade before taking it back to the Israeli side as the body dangled from the edge of the blade.
“Desecrating the dead body of a young unarmed man on the borders of the Gaza Strip in front of the cameras of the whole world is a heinous crime that adds to the occupation’s list of crimes against our Palestinian people,” said Fawzi Barhoum, a spokesman for the Hamas movement that governs the Gaza Strip, in a press statement.
According to Budour Hassan, a legal researcher with the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC), this necroviolence – the act of humiliating human bodies – is a means of exerting control over bodies of the Palestinians.
“We see it as an extension of an entire policy designed by Israel to control bodies of Palestinians,” Hassan told Al Jazeera.
A Rock and a Hard Place: What is it like to live in Jerusalem?
The word necroviolence, Hassan added, is borrowed from anthropologist Jason De Leon’s book, The Land of Open Graves, in which he coined the term to describe the mistreatment of bodies of migrants who crossed the US border from Mexico.
Hassan added that while desecrating Palestinian bodies was not exceptional to the Israeli forces, the video of the incident was a rare instance where it was carried out publicly.
“Israel carries out similar forms of humiliation on bodies silently in morgues or in the cemeteries of numbers,” she explained, referring to mass graves marked with numbers etched on metal plates rather than names.
The cemeteries are situated in secret locations that Israel has deemed closed military zones. Some of the bodies have been there since the 1967 war.
Furthermore, the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute in Tel Aviv, which holds bodies of Palestinians killed in alleged attacks on Israelis, is notoriously known as the place where Palestinian organs and body parts have been harvested.
According to JLAC and Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights, an NGO, Israel is the only country in the world that has a policy of confiscation of human remains, where it relies on regulations dating back to 1945 (during the British Mandate) as grounds for its policy.
In September 2019, the Israeli High Court approved the practice after several legal cases were brought against the state.
According to Adalah, the ruling stated that emergency regulations allowed the Israeli military to order temporary burial of Palestinians classified as enemies “based on considerations that take into account state security, civil order, and the need to negotiate for the return of the bodies of Israeli soldiers”.
However, international law considers the practice a violation of human rights. According to the Geneva Conventions, the parties of an armed conflict must bury the deceased in an honorable way, “if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged and that their graves are respected, properly maintained, and marked in such a way that they can always be recognized”. (Even Osama Bin-Laden had a better end)
Ramy Abdu, the founder of the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, said Israel withholding bodies of Palestinians is an act of collective violence that is considered a war crime.
“The Israeli authorities have repeatedly adopted a policy of withholding Palestinian bodies, which blatantly contradicts several international conventions,” Abdu told Al Jazeera.
“Articles in the Geneva Conventions assure the necessity of burying the bodies of deceased detainees or those who were killed with respect according to procedures that are appropriate with their religious culture,” he added.
‘Dehumanising Palestinian bodies’
According to the JLAC, 52 bodies of Palestinians have been detained by the Israeli government as part of a cabinet decision in 2016.
A further 18 bodies were also detained by Israel from the 2014 Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip, whereas the cemeteries of numbers hold at least 253 bodies.
“There are two branches to this policy,” Hassan said. “One is the legalised violence that is approved by the Israeli High Court, and the other is the violence practised by the Israeli army. Both follow the same pattern of dehumanising Palestinian bodies.”
It is widely known that Israel employs the practice as a tactic for leverage in negotiations. In 2012, Israel released bodies of 90 Palestinians in a gesture for reviving peace talks. Between 2013 and 2014, some 27 bodies were returned.
Speaking about Sunday’s incident, Israeli Defence Minister Naftali Bennett confirmed the bulldozer was used to “collect” al-Naim’s body.
He said he intended to keep the bodies from Gaza to use as bargaining chips with “Palestinian militants” in body-swap deals, and slammed the uproar over withholding al-Naim’s body as the “hypocritical criticism of the left”.
“I back the IDF that killed the terrorist and collected the body,” he said in a post on Twitter. “This is how it should be done, and this is how it will be done.”
Hassan said while Bennett’s comments are not surprising, they are interesting in the way “it justifies the extent to which Palestinians have been dehumanised in Israeli media and by Israeli officials which is a culmination of the whole system of necroviolence that is being exerted on Palestinians”.
12 children among dozens killed in Israel’s merciless slaughter. Eighty percent of the fatalities are civilians and half of the injured are women and children, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
In a letter sent to the Israeli chief military advocate general, Adalah called for a criminal investigation of the incident, and termed the manhandling of the body a “blatant” violation of international criminal law, human rights and humanitarian law.
“The Israeli Supreme Court has likewise recognized in past rulings that harm to the dignity of the deceased is a violation of Israel’s basic law: human dignity and liberty,” the center said.
Aida Touma-Sliman, a Palestinian Israeli member of Knesset representing the Hadash party – a part of the Joint List alliance, called Bennett “the minister of death and brutality”.
“They steal a body, abuse it with a bulldozer and still argue that the army is the most moral in the world,” she said. “Since Bennett took office as defense minister, hoarding bodies to bargain with is Israel’s declared policy.”
Ofer Cassif, another Joint List parliamentarian, called the abduction of a body as “the nauseating, blood-thirsty act of vampirism”.
“Here is what [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu has to offer: Siege, killing and abducting bodies,” Cassif wrote on Twitter. “We need to put an end to their celebration of death.”