Israel Shamir – July 5, 2009
The honeymoon President Barack Obama has enjoyed with the media since his inauguration was abruptly over – after the Cairo Speech
. After his promise of peace with the Islamic world, in no time this savior of America, the man who said Yes, We Can became increasingly lonely and besieged by an unlikely coalition of Zionists, the loony left and right-wing racists.
Barack Obama has become the bane
of Israeli Jews, wrote the Jewish Forward
’s Nathan Jeffai. Only 6% of Jewish Israelis consider his views pro-Israel, while over 50% see him as pro-Palestinian and about 30% consider him neutral. This President is lethal for both Israel and the free world, exclaimed the starry-eyed British Zionist columnist, Melanie Phillips
. Obama, she said, is destroying “the security not just of Israel but the world through his reckless appeasement of Iran”. He “has actively undercut the Iranian democrats… Obama has decided America will ‘live with’ a nuclear Iran. Which leaves Israel hung out to dry”. There are hundreds, nay, thousands of such pieces, relentlessly attacking the President for trying to stop Israel’s abuse of Palestine. They turn the man who received some 80% of the Jewish vote into a black monster craving for Jewish blood.
The Israel Lobby’s hatred of the president became a new secret taboo never to be spoken of, just silently acknowledged – like the Israel Lobby’s drive for the Iraq war and for a bombing of Iran. In a short video shot by Max Blumenthal
, still not discovered by the Search-and-Destroy team of AIPAC). An important and rather sane American voice, the Huffington Post
also took the video down, claiming it “had no news value”. Richard Silverstein
mused that “for some
liberal political websites posting material that is too embarrassing for Israel is not kosher, even if it is Israelis or Jews themselves who are doing the embarrassing.”
The neocons attacked Obama because of his stand on Iran
. When the President refused the pressure and did not try to de-legitimise the Iranian government, Paul Wolfowitz, the man behind the Iraq War personally demanded
to see more blood.
However, the truly horrific power of the Lobby is in its ability to mobilize masses of people of ostensibly differing views and lead them to a single goal. After the Lobby began drawing his blood, certain left-wing writers and our internet media happily joined the Obama lynching party.
William Blum is not a neocon like Wolfowitz or Caroline Glick
, he is a strong critic
of the American Empire. Like more than a few
American Jews, Blum compared
Obama with Adolf Hitler. Blum is not that hard on Israel. He would not compare Zionists with Hitler. “Instead of getting tangled up in who (Israel or Palestinians) started the current mess”, he writes
, as if it is an obscure point, he stresses that “Israel's existence is not at stake” and wonders about legacy of “the idealistic Zionist pioneers”. But Obama is a Hitler for Blum, because … Hitler also gave a speech for peace and against war (!?). For LaRouche
, Obama is like Hitler for some other crazy reason. The mad Trot wing of the Lobby usually has its own, special reasons to be against enemies of the Jews, but their bottom line is always the same as for the stalwart Republican women group
Blum typifies the left-wing Obama bashers. They do not care that Obama has been endorsed by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. They disregard the voice of Patrick Seale
, the doyen of Middle East journalism, a friend of the Syrian Assads who was fully satisfied with Obama’s advances. They are surely more radical.
They complain that Obama did not actually congratulate Ahmadinejad and did not support him. They complain that he did not undo in a month everything that was done during last hundred years. They complain why he did not dismiss everybody who was somebody in Clinton administration. They complain why the US did not join Iran and North Korea in the Axis of Evil. They complain that Obama did not put all the Goldman Sachs staff into a maximum security prison, next to Bernie Madoff.
The Obama lynching party does not even try to be fair: any story can be provided with a misleading anti-Obama headline. Our friend Cynthia McKinney
, the wonderful ex-Congresswoman and a Green Party presidential candidate, joined the Free Gaza run trying to break the Israeli-imposed Gaza siege. This was a noble and daring enterprise, alas, doomed to fail: as expected, the Israeli state-run pirates seized their ship in international waters and briefly jailed her before deporting her. The story was correctly written by the Free Gaza movement, but afterwards, it was forwarded and placed on our friends’ sites under false and misleading headline: “Obama State Dept. intervenes to block Free Gaza aid voyage”. (You can read it here
, among the rest). The headline was not provided by the Free Gaza, as it appears. The US State Department actually did NOT intervene. The Left leg of the Lobby succeeded in smearing Obama – though the State Department is run by Mme Clinton, and President Obama can’t yet override her and all the rest. Other unwitting agents of the Lobby re-ran the same story under the headline “Obama okays Israel's piracy”. Nothing in the text
(by Paul Craig Roberts) implies or justifies the headline.
Obama bashers ask why he did not send the Sixth Fleet to lift the Gaza siege, and why the Navy Seals did not protect Cynthia McKinney, and they conclude that the president “betrayed” Cynthia and Gaza. Instead, they could pay attention to the fact that the American mainstream media gave zero coverage
to the Free Gaza plight. The Masters of Discourse, media lords, the networks are the guilty ones, not the President.
Government is the art of the possible, the art of compromise. Rulers need consensus, and consensus can’t be built if the media is hostile. American mainstream media is Jewish-owned and Jewish-operated, and it has its own red lines. Rulers who forget this get impeached or assassinated. When President J F Kennedy tried to stop and undo the Dimona Project, he was killed, and his position taken by Lyndon B Johnson, the most devout Zionist who allowed Israelis to build their nuclear arsenal and to attack the USS Liberty. If Obama were to send the Fleet, he would be assassinated, and his place would be taken by an arch-zionist Vice President Joe Biden. What’s worse, the American public would not understand his steps. A hostile media would not allow him to be understood.
Obama had built-in limitations: without Biden as the surety, he would never have been allowed to win. Without Axelrod and Rahm, he would not be allowed to rule. These limitations are the direct result of America being formed, educated and guided by its pre-eminently Jewish elites of the last fifty years. The majority of Americans are pro-Israel and are pro-Jewish. This can change, but probably not as fast and as drastically as some would like. This is not only the Congress that is devoted to Jewish causes: a few generations of Americans have been brought up on Hollywood brainwashing, Holocaust stories and Israel worship. By speaking against the settlements, Obama already came very close to the red line no American leader may cross but at his great peril. He may do more, and he should be pushed to do more, but it is the Lobby and its media lords who should be attacked, not the President.
We should be more aware of the distortions created by Obama would-be lynchers. The coup d’etat in Honduras was presented as “Obama’s First Coup d’Etat”
by many sites who swallowed the crypto-Zionist Trot lie - actually, Obama condemned the coup immediately. Our friend and expert on Latin America, Maria Poumier, writes in a penetrating essay Obama did not invade Honduras
“The putsch in Honduras failed, thanks to Obama. This is the view of Fidel Castro and of Chavez. The coup was planned by the Zionist Lobby, by Miami neocons, who want to push the blame on Obama… but Chavez and Fidel [Mme Poumier has an access to both leaders] greet with enthusiasm the “chavization of Obama”. A Cuban analyst
interprets the events in Honduras as “a sign of the declining American Empire’s loss of control”. After the failure to radio-control a civil war in Iran, partly because of the coolness and unwillingness of Obama, it is a new rout for the hawks, so let us be happy with our success.”
Maria Poumier admits that “Obama’s freedom of action is very limited. Neither the CIA nor the Pentagon wants to obey him. Zionists in the Democrat Party intended to manage him. But they miscalculated. He is not a raw material for their schemes… Obama may rule as a king by divine right, being endorsed by the people of the whole world, and he knows it. He is torn between two possible roles: to be the Chavez or Ahmadinejad of the north, or to stick to the role that was envisaged by the original scenario, the role of a modernizing instrument of the malicious empire. A king can be a good king if the people support him and push him in the right direction. He can achieve nothing, if the intellectuals succeed in antagonising the people against him.”
I am worried that the Lobby succeeded in activating so many forces against Obama. The most outspoken enemies of Jews also got hitched up to the wagon. Not only they are infiltrated
, they are easy to manipulate. A reference to Rahm Emanuel would suffice for them to join in the Lobby’s attack on the president. They spread malicious jokes about Rahm commanding Obama and gleefully number all the Jews in the Administration. I once witnessed the same modus operandi in action against Vladimir Putin. The Russian president was ferociously attacked for exiling and jailing Jewish oligarchs, and at the same time, the Lobby’s agents spread around pictures of Putin in a kippa and listed the Jews in his administration. The idea is to undermine the people’s trust in the President, be it Putin or Obama.
Putin and Obama are due to meet this week. They may compare notes: how to survive the Lobby’s attack; and Putin, not the most brilliant of the two, nevertheless may give sound advice. Putin won by removing the mass media from the oligarchs’ clutches. They lost their TV stations, and after that they were not dangerous anymore. They still have their regional newspapers, and they as hostile to Putin as ever, but without TV they can’t hypnotise the mass man.
The same advice could be given by Chavez – it is thanks to his satellite TV network TELESUR, the putschists in Honduras failed to get international recognition. Now Chavez intends to take the media away from the hostile media lords. This should be done in the US, too. Free media is not necessarily a Jewish-owned one, after all!
“No, I will not take part in the lapidation of Obama”, concludes Maria Poumier, and I second her decision: I would not take part in the lynching. I agree with the view of our friend Gilad Atzmon, who wrote
“President Obama seems to realise what is going on. He knows about the humiliation, he knows about the starvation of Gaza. The fact that he allows himself to juxtapose the Holocaust and Gaza proves that he is a million years ahead of most Palestinian solidarity campaigners who are reluctant to engage in this necessary equation just to avoid offending one Jew or another.
The president has still long way to go. And yet, President Obama has made a major step in the last few days. He is now marching America towards humanism. He reclaims the American ideology of liberty. I salute the man, I salute the great intellect, I salute the humanist. Gladly I am to admit that God has blessed America. But someone had better take very good care of the safety of its president. He has some fierce and relentless enemies out there. And as we know, they do not stop on red!”
The enemies of Obama are indeed plentiful, from out-and-out racists who hate to be ruled by a black, to Zionists who are afraid Obama will take an independent course, to loony radicals of the left and of the right. We should stop them, not add to their numbers.
Last updated 08/07/2009