|
April 10, 2007
Prisoners,
Friends and Enemies
by Eugene E. Narrett, Ph.D.
For two weeks, in late March and early April
2007 fifteen British navy personnel received
intense media coverage after being snatched from
the Persian Gulf by an Iranian boat. Iran paraded
the prisoners before cameras for rehearsed
apologies which created outrage in America and
even in Britain. Since the British were close to
but apparently not in Iranian waters
their abduction was an act of war (recall
the Barbary pirates) and their
treatment violated international
laws protecting prisoners. But England's
fellow EU states, obligated by law to come to
her defense, looked away. Their commerce with Iran,
principally Germany whose $6.2 billion in
bank-credits backed ultimately by German tax payers
supports German corporations in Iran and covers
Iran's trade deficit with Europe left their
governments indifferent to the prisoners' and to
the issues at stake. Eurabia strikes again.
And after all, Britain has betrayed them many
times, not least into the partitions, financial
deals and surrenders that triggered WW II.
Perhaps this is part of the wages of the
vague war on terror. After all, are we at war
with Iran? Their leaders often say that they are at
war with us while our leaders engage in
extended diplomatic processes of obscure
design. It seems that what Joseph Conrad
called "the flabby, weak-eyed, pretending devil of
rapacious and pitiless folly" has struck again; has
moved in, perhaps for the duration...
But in April 2007,
with American flotillas on the way and
strong statements from President Bush, the
mullahs released the Britons. This attention and
the result highlighted contrasts to similar
situations with other soldiers held in jihadist
captivity a very long time.
On June 24, 2006, an Israeli tank crew guarding
its border with the Gaza terror entity (now
Jew-free per the "Disengagement") was attacked. Two
soldiers were killed and a third, Gilad Shalit was
captured. This act of war did not prompt a genuine
war in response but it's been months since Israel
began a unilateral ceasefire, Shalit remains
captive and rockets continue to rain down within
Israel's 1949 borders. Mr. Bush's "man of courage,"
long-time Fatah leader, holocaust-denier and friend
of Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas demands that one thousand
to thirteen hundred terrorists be released in
exchange for Shalit who may not be alive.
On July 12, Israeli soldiers guarding their
northern border with Lebanon were attacked by
Hizbollah. Half a dozen were killed and two, Ehud
Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were taken prisoner.
Like Shalit they have not been seen since,
long-term violations of international law. But
since they're Jews it seems to be ok with the major
media. As with the dislocation of nearly a million
Jews from their homes during Hezbollah's
indiscriminate rocket attacks there is no
"humanitarian crisis" apparently because of a
diplomatic-media consensus that Jews are not fully
human.
Are the three Israelis, and the Jews of Israel
generally "with us or against us" to paraphrase the
President's famous words of fall 2001? Is their
nation, Israel with or against the American
government? These are the questions raised by their
continuing captivity. Exploring them leads to
valuable distinctions, disturbing realities and
points to a choice the west soon must make.
Agreeing to ceasefires without freeing
these prisoners were failures of the leading
political and military echelons in Israel. But
their continued retentions are war crimes that
violate international law. But American
Secretary of State Rice visits ever more
frequently as the US government increases its
support of Mahmoud Abbas as chief of a Fatah-Hamas
state in Judea and Samaria whose expulsion of Jews
is the main policy objective of the Bush
administration. (Some would argue that this is
secondary, the prime goal being endless
bloodletting in an endless war of attrition, also
known as "the War System"). Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi, in some ways a competitor of
Bush has met with Dictator Bashir Asad, giving
a semblance of legitimacy to Syria which is one of
the main jihadist bases in the world. So Pelosi and
the State Department are kissing cousins; their
target is the same. Democratic regimes stoke the
War System, albeit with different rhetoric and
somewhat different methods than Republican ones, as
history shows.
In any case, there is a glaring discrepancy
between the American responses to the
Israeli-Jewish captives, seized inside their own
nation, and to those Britons seized by Iran in the
Persian Gulf. And there is the ongoing matter of
Jonathan Pollard whom America's ruling
echelons have buried alive because he
shared with Israel satellite photos of Iraqi,
Syrian and Libyan WMD aimed at Israel. Did Reagan
administration officials want Israel to get
obliterated or just made more pliable to various
forms of blackmail? Didn't America itself attack
Iraq twice? Didn't it bomb Libya? Is the
American government a friend or enemy of
Israel? Uncomfortable questions will keep
one out of the mainstream media.
The above discrepancies bid us ask "what is
the United States of America?" It is important for
Americans to define its constituent parts and so
Israel can be clear on whether it is a friend,
enemy or both of the "USA." Lack of clarity on this
issue has been suffocating the Jewish state
since 1969.
Common usage, reinforced by media blur the fact
that "the United States" is the name of a nation
and also a government; that this government
consists of three branches, Legislative, Judicial
and Executive that check and balance each other
though hardly to the degree intended by the
Founders: the Executive branch has become a vast
bureaucracy and activist courts have usurped the
legislative function. Both the Executive and
Judiciary often war on the basic principles of
the United States and the abiding beliefs of its
people (58% of whom support Israel, for example,
while 18% support the "Palestinians"; 85% of whom
oppose "civil unions" or "marriage" for gays and
lesbians while the courts and media continue to
create precedents for them).
One could demonstrate that the self-aggrandizing
size, prerogatives and costs of the Executive and
Judiciary have enslaved Americans and degraded the
nation's credit in the world.
Moreover, within the Executive Branch there are
many fiefdoms the most powerful of which are the
departments which dominate the National Security
Council (formed 1947). The membership of the
departments of State, Treasury and the CIA
especially are drawn from prestigious groups funded
and indirectly directed by America's ruling
corporate interests who care no more for Americans
than they do for Jews or Arabs or Africans though
it is Americans and Israel that they want most to
break.
The goal, a regionalized world-state in which
society is built like a pyramid, of the perennial
regime that drives American diplomacy, military
action or inaction, and monetary policies is and
has been since 1938 totally hostile to Jews in
Israel. The views of a given President, Republican
or Democrat on this matter do little to change its
thrust. The policies of the Nixon, Carter,
Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II administrations
all have focused on keeping Jews out of Judea and
Samaria and turning it back into what it became
under Britain and its proxies: an Arab entity, part
of an Arab Federation or "New Middle East." The
perennial socialist regime in Israel is glad to
oblige, for a 'seat at the table,' for various
emoluments and the promise of being 'allowed to
pass,' of forgetting its roots as all genuine
progressives strive to do.
Those who supply cadres and heads for the
Departments of State, Treasury and the CIA come
from the Trilateral Commission (recall Jimmy Carter
and Zbigniew Brzezinski) and the Council on Foreign
Affairs both under the sway of the Rockefeller
empire whose main goals since 1913 have
been eugenics (massive population reduction
and Aryanization) and the "march toward a world
government, [a] supranational sovereignty
of an intellectual elite and world bankers"
(David Rockefeller to a Trilateral group, June
1991). At that meeting, Rockefeller thanked "the
Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine
and other great publications whose directors have
attended out meetings and respected their promises
of discretion for forty years."
That's how one gets and keeps control of public
discourse, -- deflect, disinform, and deny the
dirty agenda of the elite who have bought and can
replace you. The least truth-oriented people are
selected and promoted: those who won't get and stay
with "our plan for the world" are excluded or
crushed.
Noting media bias thus is like bailing a rowboat
with a hole in its bottom: many good points may be
made but the boat will sink. Indeed, Israel and the
free west have been sinking while the "world
community," its gangsters and biases are exalted by
the major media and the infamous "discretion" it
exercises for its masters.
So the United States of America consists of a
government in three main branches, its executive
branch ruled by a policy group whose views, methods
and goals are at variance with the
government's original purpose and, still, with
Congress. It also is at odds and, arguably at war
with its own people as shown by the relentless push
toward a North American Union, effacing its borders
and integrating Mexico's Social Security system
with that of America; or by the declaration and
fudging of a "war on terror" in which victory
is not defined for its real face, the loss of civil
liberties could not be defended. Once it is
achieved no defense will be needed for no dissent
will be brooked. Whatever is not mandatory will be
forbidden.
Those who care about Israel and Jewish
sovereignty there need always to remember and
communicate these distinctions. They need to
strengthen and maintain their bonds with the
American people with whom they have more and more
in common (dangerously open borders, dissolving
sovereignty and bonds to the Hebrew Scriptures)
while dismissing those politicians who prattle
about their "close friendship" with the American
Executive Branch, especially its
diplomatic-intelligence community.
America and Israel must continue to work
together in military preparedness and economic
growth on many levels. But Israelis and Americans
must discern what aspects of these ties are for
life, national integrity and victory for the
American and Israeli peoples and what forces and
individuals are to be kept at arm's length, their
pledges, guarantees and processes shunned as the
poison they are. Then not only will the prisoners
return to Zion but the American and Israeli people,
who share so much that is basic to life will be
free to return to their roots and strength: ordered
liberty, settlement and vigorous defense of their
land.
Instead of a new hi-tech pyramid model for
civilization its alternative, the Temple Mount and
teachings of Sinai can be the source of victory and
true peace; instead of slavery to corporate
socialists there will be true freedom, the gift of
the Jewish people as expressed in Passover and the
settled nation, a free people in its land.
Narrett
Archive
Dr.
Eugene Narrett is a writer and teacher in
Massachusetts and is the author of Gathered
Against Jerusalem: Essays on a False
Peace
(Dec. 2000). His book, Israel Awakened: A
Chronicle of the Oslo War (2001), is currently
available at www.1stbooks.com/bookview/7421.
His latest book, WW III: the War on the Jews and
the Rise of the World Security State (2007), is
available at www.lightcatcherbooks.com.
Visit his website at www.israelendtimes.com.
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
|
Academy
Showcase Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|
|