Anisa Abd el Fattah
As a result of downloading and sharing with various news outlets, highly sensitive and sometimes classified information never made public before, an organization known as Wikileaks has been catapulted onto the front pages of every major newspaper in the world. As a result, people everywhere are asking who is behind the Wikileaks operation and why Wiki is leaking.
These are good questions considering that the organization seems to have access not only to extremely sensitive US government defense files, but also diplomatic cables between embassies and secret information belonging to banks and powerful corporations. Most government and bank employees don’t have access to this type of information, which makes it clear that Wikileaks activists are not simply disgruntled government or bank employees as some might suspect, just having a good time embarrassing and frustrating the US government and major banks. It’s also pretty clear that Wikileaks is not an organization that is being energized by a desire for publicity and or notoriety, since it seems that only its founder and leader, Julian Assange is recognizable.
Questions that seek to ascertain if indeed Wikileaks is a criminal enterprise seem to have taken a backseat to a more philosophical conversation that focuses mostly on the morality of what Wikileaks does. That conversation is saturated with somewhat esoteric idealism that pits the small and anonymous Wikileaks in opposition to a government and elite behemoth that is wrapped in unnecessary secrecy. In this respect, it is the secrecy itself that is the target and the details of what is actually being leaked, and its potentially negative impact is seen as merely collateral damage in a war being fought for greater transparency. Wikileaks describes itself in such terms saying on its website:
"Wikileaks is a non profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for independent sources around the world to leak information to our journalists. We publish information of ethical, political and historical significance, while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices."
Wikileaks heads one of its various websites with a banner saying, “Keep us strong, help Wikileaks keep governments open.”
On the other side of the conversation are those who say that Wikileaks is a criminal outfit that is carrying out cyber warfare against the United States. In a USA Today article, (Wikileaks actions: An act of cyber war?) former State Department official under the Bush administration, Christian Whiton said;
“Assaulting the company electronically is something worth trying…it buys you time to go after the organization in other ways.” According to the article, Whiton believes that Wikileaks is a “foreign organization trying to impede US policy.” [1]
US Attorney General Eric Holder has said that Wikileaks is the subject of an “active and ongoing criminal investigation.” This statement is contextualized by Holder’s earlier statement, where he said, “To the extent that we can find anybody involved in the breaking of America law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described…” [2]
Between these two opinions of Wikileaks in respect to its motives, there still lies the question of Wikileaks criminality. To most observers it is obvious that Wikileaks is not an overtly criminal operation. There does not seem to be any statute that criminalizes publishing sensitive information that has been censored to protect the names of US assets and to censor other information that might be deemed harmful to US interests. According to The New York Times and other news outlets that actually published the information, all information deemed harmful to US interests and assets was redacted.
On December 8th, 2010 National Public Radio,(NPR) aired a program called Fresh Air, which is hosted by Terry Goss. Goss interviewed the New York Time’s Washington Correspondent David Sanger. Sanger makes it clear in the interview that the New York Times acted in cooperation with the US government to insure that no Wikileaks information was released that would harm US interests in any significant way.
An online journal known as Global Research.ca published a transcript of the Sanger interview. In the introduction to the transcript, Michael Chossodovsky, the sites founder and editor wrote the following observations:
"The following transcript points to the involvement of the corporate media including the New York Times in the Wikileaks project. How do we interpret this relationship? The corporate media is the source of disinformation and at the same time it is supporting "transparency" and truth in media. David E. Sanger, Washington Correspondent of the New York Times, worked closely with Wikileaks. He was involved in the distribution, editing and dissemination of the leaked documents. Sanger is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Aspen Strategy Group together with Madeleine K. Albright, Richard Hass, R Talbott, Robert.B. Zoellick (president of the World Bank), and Philip Zelikow (formerly executive director of the 9/11 Commission).
We have highlighted a number of important statements in the first part of this interview, which confirm that the NYT has not only been involved in the selection and redacting of the Wikileaks documents, it has undertaken these activities in consultation with the US government.
Unquestionably the released documents constitute an important data bank in their own right. The question is who controls and oversees the selection, distribution and editing of the released documents to the broader public. What interests are being served?"[3]
Along with those who don't feel that Wikileaks is a criminal enterprise, and that Wikileaks in fact works in cooperation with the US government, there are also those who feel that Wikileaks has been used by the Israeli government to leak information that actually facilitates Israel’s foreign policy objectives that include a US war with Iran.
In an article published by World Bulletin, (Wikileaks-The Tel Aviv Connection) author Jeff Gates wrote:
"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Con me consistently for six decades and the relationship is over, as is Israel’s credibility as a legitimate nation state. Tel Aviv knows this, but what can the Zionist state do about it? Answer: Wikileaks. Why now? Misdirection!" [4]
In Gate’s opinion, Wikileaks is possibly a Mossad operation. He said,”
"Any credible forensics would start by asking: “To what benefit?” Then look to the means, motive and opportunity plus the presence of stable nation-state intelligence inside the US. Other than Israel, who else is a credible candidate? Notice how quickly Israel’s role in the peace process vanished from the news. Now, its Iran, Iran, Iran. To whose benefit? Tel Aviv knows that the phony intelligence on Iraq leads to those skilled at waging war “by way of deception” the Mossad." [5]
Gates goes on to say: “Wikileaks are noteworthy for what’s missing: the absence of any material damaging to Israel goals. But still, Tel Aviv faces an unprecedented peril: transparency. Americans know they were duped. And Israel rightly fears that Americans will soon realize by whom.”
In the most recent development, US Senator Joseph Lieberman along with Senator Diane Feinstein, is seeking to have Wikileaks founder Julian Assange prosecuted under an antiquated and highly controversial law known as the Espionage Act. Sounding the alarm on this approach in an article published by the Huffington Post (Espionage Act: How the Government Can Engage in Serious Aggression Against the People of the United States, Dec.10, 2010) writer Naomi Wolf wrote,
"Presidential candidate Eugene Debs received a ten-year prison sentence in 1918 under the Espionage Act for daring to read the First Amendment in public. The roundup of ordinary citizens -- charged with the Espionage Act -- who were jailed for daring to criticize the government, was so effective in deterring others from speaking up that the Act silenced dissent in this country for a decade. In the wake of this traumatic history, it was left untouched -- until those who wish the same outcome began to try to reanimate it again starting five years ago, and once again, now. Seeing the Espionage Act rise up again is, for anyone who knows a thing about it, like seeing the end of a horror movie in which the zombie that has enslaved the village just won't die."[6]
It is no secret that for years Joseph Lieberman has sought some way to criminalize free speech in respect to a citizen’s right to criticize the government and government allies, most specifically Israel. There have also been rumors that one of the uses that Israel has for Wikileaks is to create a crisis and a cause for emergency measures to be put in place that would supposedly stop the leaks and the danger they allegedly represent to the US government and its interest requiring internet censorship. Now it seems that it might also be used to revive an ancient law, antiquated mostly due to its blatant violation of the US Constitution’s first amendment.
Also, none of us are likely to ever forget former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel’s’ remark that no crisis should ever go unexploited. In respect to the Wikileaks leaks, it seems that for whatever reason Wiki leaks, its leaks have served more than the cause of transparency.
[1] USA Today, Wikileaks actions: An act of cyberwar? http:/www.usatoday.com/clearprint/?1292293292303
[2] Jonathan M. Seidl, “AG Holder says Wikileaks under criminal investigation” www.theblaze.com/ stories/holder-says-wikileaks-under-criminal-investigation/
[3] PBS Interview: “The Redacting and Selection of Wikileaks documents by the Corporate Media”, cited at Global Research; www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?content=viewArticles&codes=20101212articleID=22378
[4] http:/www.worldbulliten.net.news/_print .php?id=66903
[5] Ibid.
[6]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/post_1394_b_795001.html
Showing posts with label Greater Israel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greater Israel. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Friday, April 30, 2010
Death of a two state solution could give birth to a free Palestine
Anisa Abd el Fattah
Now that a noted and respected academician, Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, has suggested that a two state solution is dead, and that the result of that death will be the birth of Greater Israel as an apartheid state, we are free to stop wasting our time analyzing and hoping to improve upon and return to Oslo, and the idea of a negotiated end to the illegal occupation of Palestine.
It has been clear to most analysts for many years, and even pronounced on numerous occasions by the political leaders of the occupation administration, that there would be no Palestinian state allowed to co-exist side by side with the Jews envisioned Jewish Only state. For some reason, Arabs saw great merit in the Oslo formula for peace, even though it did not guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian state as an end result of a successful peace process. Indeed all along the Oslo path, it was very clear that the occupation was expanding on the ground, as it falsely spoke of peace. Even more importantly, after every failed round of so called negotiations, the Palestinians would be punished with various massacres and other acts of violence intended to cull the number of Palestinians, and also to further intimidate them, in preparation for the end game, which was always to be a single Jewish only state where the Palestinians would be allowed to exist in limited and controlled numbers, for the purpose of providing cheap labor.
For some reason, perhaps wishful thinking, many people confused the idea of peace in respect to Oslo, with the idea of freedom. The occupation has never offered the Palestinian people freedom. It has offered them quiet co-existence, but only according to the type of co-existence that is prescribed by the Talmudic law. That law suggests that Palestinian citizens of a Jewish only state are second, or even third class citizens whose purpose, as was reported by a noted Rabbi, would be to serve the Jews. In other words, not only does the one state solution from the Zionist perspective mean victory for Zionism whether over the long or short term, it also means absolute defeat for the Palestinians. Just as the American pioneers defeated and led the Native Americans off to reservations to die, so too the Palestinians will be allowed to live in their reservations, defeated and humiliated after years of struggle against a brutal and illegal occupation.
The prospect of the establishment of Greater Israel is of course completely unacceptable to most Muslims, and we can expect that there will be Muslims who will be willing to mount resistance against it. Yet, based upon past performance, we might anticipate that for the secular Arab nationalists leaders and monarchs, so long as they can continue to rule over their people in some capacity and to continue to be paid through either foreign aid, trade schemes, etc., the idea might not be so bad. In fact, it would not be much different from the way in which they co-exist with the occupation today. The only difference might be that rather than hiding their secret arrangements for normalized relations, and trade, they can complain to their people that the newly established Jewish state is in fact a done deal that all must accept and accommodate. With some groaning, it will be accepted as an accomplished fact and with very little resistance, to the extent that some of the financial rewards trickle down to pacify the people, as Israel has promised. There does not seem to be any way to attribute, or any reason to expect either integrity or good judgment on the part of the Arab leaders. There is absolutely no reason to expect that they will act on principle and stand with those Palestinians and Muslims who will resist being defeated in this way.
It is also important to note, that there is no reason to accept the idea that the death of a two state solution can only result in greater Israel as an apartheid state. The truth is, that the death of the two state fake peace process scheme, can result in freedom for Palestine, if the Palestinian people are ready psychologically and spiritually for what will perhaps be the most difficult push against the occupation in the history of the occupation.
It will require that they abandon not only the rhetoric of the status quo and its insistence that Israel exists as a legal entity with a supposed special right to exist, and that what is happening is merely a land dispute that is being resolved by the natural selection of a better armed, more powerfully supported Jewish entity. The Palestinians will have to create their own narrative and it cannot in any way yield in even the slightest way to either accommodation, or appeasement of the occupation and its enablers. The people must prepare to fight and to possibly die in pursuit of their freedom. We must admit the likelihood that no amount of disinvestment or boycotts will be allowed to weaken Israel, and the UNSC will never impose sanctions upon Israel. At best, BDS will prevent the business buzzards from profiting from the illegal occupation. The US and EU will subsidize any loss that Israel might experience from divestment, so in reality, the people of the US and EU are the ones who will be punished by BDS and that might be appropriate, but not very helpful to the Palestinians in the short term, which is when Israel will make its push to take control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, annexing them as part of Greater Israel.
The Palestinian narrative, in direct contradiction to the Zionist narrative must deprive the anticipated Jewish only state of all legitimacy, and it must stand boldly upon the law. It cannot capitulate in any way to the idea of co-existence or the supposed right of Israel to exist. It must reject completely the lie that Israel was established as an act of justice to a Jewish people who are reclaiming a lost land based upon a fake promise from God. It must reject the British mandate as a fraud and theft, and demand justice and an end to US and EU unconditional financial and military support for a criminal enterprise and genocide. It must insist that the occupation exists in violation of international laws and treaties, and must also seek to criminalize those who support the illegal occupation, just as the occupation and its enablers have sought to criminalize all support for Palestinian freedom.
The people of the Arab and Muslim world must adopt this narrative and must live by it, refusing normalized relations of any type with the occupation or the Jews anywhere. This is another area where boycott can be effective, if it is a boycott of Jewish products being sold in Muslim countries. The people must accept that we are at war not only with a people, but with an idea and that idea is Greater Israel which is supported by a majority of Jews from throughout the world.
We must never accept the idea of a Jewish only state, or Greater Israel and the subjugation of the Palestinians as slaves living as third class citizens within that state. It will require that the Palestinian refugees dispersed throughout the Arab and Muslim world, become more involved and active as participants in the Palestinian resistance and it will require that Muslims everywhere, just as Jews everywhere, recognize that we are at war, not for land as they are, but for freedom. The war is for freedom of these, and for all other peoples living under occupation. The Zionists are fighting for land, but the Palestinians and the conscientious people of the world who support them will resist in pursuit of justice and freedom, not only for Palestinians but also for those who we know will soon fall prey to this same challenge, as the imperialists, emboldened by success in Palestine, intensify their drive to take over the Muslim and Arab world and also the resources, including the people of the region.
The death of the two state solution could give life to a free Palestine, but only if the people of the world decide that Palestine must be freed. We must decide to end this illegal occupation that is threatening to use brute strength to capture and enslave an indigenous people based upon a false narrative that has been used deceptively to convince the world that an illegal and criminal enterprise has been imposed upon us by a Jewish god that has supposedly enslaved Gentiles to serve these supposed chosen people. A chosen people whose society is overrun with organized crime, prostitution, human trafficking, government corruption, and the guilt of innocent blood, spilled without conscience, or consequence. We, meaning the entire world, is at a crossroads, and we must decide now, that Palestine will either be free, or lost forever to Greater Israel, a criminal apartheid state. If we decide that Palestine should die, be prepared, because there will be no hope for Africa, or Latin America or any of the other small countries with coveted land and resources. The battle for Palestine will be the last battle for freedom in our time. Decide now to win or surrender.
Now that a noted and respected academician, Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, has suggested that a two state solution is dead, and that the result of that death will be the birth of Greater Israel as an apartheid state, we are free to stop wasting our time analyzing and hoping to improve upon and return to Oslo, and the idea of a negotiated end to the illegal occupation of Palestine.
It has been clear to most analysts for many years, and even pronounced on numerous occasions by the political leaders of the occupation administration, that there would be no Palestinian state allowed to co-exist side by side with the Jews envisioned Jewish Only state. For some reason, Arabs saw great merit in the Oslo formula for peace, even though it did not guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian state as an end result of a successful peace process. Indeed all along the Oslo path, it was very clear that the occupation was expanding on the ground, as it falsely spoke of peace. Even more importantly, after every failed round of so called negotiations, the Palestinians would be punished with various massacres and other acts of violence intended to cull the number of Palestinians, and also to further intimidate them, in preparation for the end game, which was always to be a single Jewish only state where the Palestinians would be allowed to exist in limited and controlled numbers, for the purpose of providing cheap labor.
For some reason, perhaps wishful thinking, many people confused the idea of peace in respect to Oslo, with the idea of freedom. The occupation has never offered the Palestinian people freedom. It has offered them quiet co-existence, but only according to the type of co-existence that is prescribed by the Talmudic law. That law suggests that Palestinian citizens of a Jewish only state are second, or even third class citizens whose purpose, as was reported by a noted Rabbi, would be to serve the Jews. In other words, not only does the one state solution from the Zionist perspective mean victory for Zionism whether over the long or short term, it also means absolute defeat for the Palestinians. Just as the American pioneers defeated and led the Native Americans off to reservations to die, so too the Palestinians will be allowed to live in their reservations, defeated and humiliated after years of struggle against a brutal and illegal occupation.
The prospect of the establishment of Greater Israel is of course completely unacceptable to most Muslims, and we can expect that there will be Muslims who will be willing to mount resistance against it. Yet, based upon past performance, we might anticipate that for the secular Arab nationalists leaders and monarchs, so long as they can continue to rule over their people in some capacity and to continue to be paid through either foreign aid, trade schemes, etc., the idea might not be so bad. In fact, it would not be much different from the way in which they co-exist with the occupation today. The only difference might be that rather than hiding their secret arrangements for normalized relations, and trade, they can complain to their people that the newly established Jewish state is in fact a done deal that all must accept and accommodate. With some groaning, it will be accepted as an accomplished fact and with very little resistance, to the extent that some of the financial rewards trickle down to pacify the people, as Israel has promised. There does not seem to be any way to attribute, or any reason to expect either integrity or good judgment on the part of the Arab leaders. There is absolutely no reason to expect that they will act on principle and stand with those Palestinians and Muslims who will resist being defeated in this way.
It is also important to note, that there is no reason to accept the idea that the death of a two state solution can only result in greater Israel as an apartheid state. The truth is, that the death of the two state fake peace process scheme, can result in freedom for Palestine, if the Palestinian people are ready psychologically and spiritually for what will perhaps be the most difficult push against the occupation in the history of the occupation.
It will require that they abandon not only the rhetoric of the status quo and its insistence that Israel exists as a legal entity with a supposed special right to exist, and that what is happening is merely a land dispute that is being resolved by the natural selection of a better armed, more powerfully supported Jewish entity. The Palestinians will have to create their own narrative and it cannot in any way yield in even the slightest way to either accommodation, or appeasement of the occupation and its enablers. The people must prepare to fight and to possibly die in pursuit of their freedom. We must admit the likelihood that no amount of disinvestment or boycotts will be allowed to weaken Israel, and the UNSC will never impose sanctions upon Israel. At best, BDS will prevent the business buzzards from profiting from the illegal occupation. The US and EU will subsidize any loss that Israel might experience from divestment, so in reality, the people of the US and EU are the ones who will be punished by BDS and that might be appropriate, but not very helpful to the Palestinians in the short term, which is when Israel will make its push to take control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, annexing them as part of Greater Israel.
The Palestinian narrative, in direct contradiction to the Zionist narrative must deprive the anticipated Jewish only state of all legitimacy, and it must stand boldly upon the law. It cannot capitulate in any way to the idea of co-existence or the supposed right of Israel to exist. It must reject completely the lie that Israel was established as an act of justice to a Jewish people who are reclaiming a lost land based upon a fake promise from God. It must reject the British mandate as a fraud and theft, and demand justice and an end to US and EU unconditional financial and military support for a criminal enterprise and genocide. It must insist that the occupation exists in violation of international laws and treaties, and must also seek to criminalize those who support the illegal occupation, just as the occupation and its enablers have sought to criminalize all support for Palestinian freedom.
The people of the Arab and Muslim world must adopt this narrative and must live by it, refusing normalized relations of any type with the occupation or the Jews anywhere. This is another area where boycott can be effective, if it is a boycott of Jewish products being sold in Muslim countries. The people must accept that we are at war not only with a people, but with an idea and that idea is Greater Israel which is supported by a majority of Jews from throughout the world.
We must never accept the idea of a Jewish only state, or Greater Israel and the subjugation of the Palestinians as slaves living as third class citizens within that state. It will require that the Palestinian refugees dispersed throughout the Arab and Muslim world, become more involved and active as participants in the Palestinian resistance and it will require that Muslims everywhere, just as Jews everywhere, recognize that we are at war, not for land as they are, but for freedom. The war is for freedom of these, and for all other peoples living under occupation. The Zionists are fighting for land, but the Palestinians and the conscientious people of the world who support them will resist in pursuit of justice and freedom, not only for Palestinians but also for those who we know will soon fall prey to this same challenge, as the imperialists, emboldened by success in Palestine, intensify their drive to take over the Muslim and Arab world and also the resources, including the people of the region.
The death of the two state solution could give life to a free Palestine, but only if the people of the world decide that Palestine must be freed. We must decide to end this illegal occupation that is threatening to use brute strength to capture and enslave an indigenous people based upon a false narrative that has been used deceptively to convince the world that an illegal and criminal enterprise has been imposed upon us by a Jewish god that has supposedly enslaved Gentiles to serve these supposed chosen people. A chosen people whose society is overrun with organized crime, prostitution, human trafficking, government corruption, and the guilt of innocent blood, spilled without conscience, or consequence. We, meaning the entire world, is at a crossroads, and we must decide now, that Palestine will either be free, or lost forever to Greater Israel, a criminal apartheid state. If we decide that Palestine should die, be prepared, because there will be no hope for Africa, or Latin America or any of the other small countries with coveted land and resources. The battle for Palestine will be the last battle for freedom in our time. Decide now to win or surrender.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)