Well, I don't want to be cynical or anything, and maybe it's because I just
finished that book on BARD about Trump, but let's remember that it is the
working class who are his zealous followers. It is they who avidly watch
reality TV and read all those gossip columns and articles in People Magazine
for all these years, all about celebrities. It is the working class, who
want to be rich like Trump keeps bragging about and who want to keep
outsiders, meaning anyone who looks different from them, out of our country.
Yes, they're waking up and they're angry. But are they angry because our
country isn't caring for all of us or because they aren't getting what they
want?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 9:04 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
It might have been on the streets of New York or Chicago, but this was not a
police action, it was, "an Israeli soldier who was caught on videotape
shooting in the head, at close range, a Palestinian man who was wounded and
lying on the ground, already subdued and obviously not a threat."
But whether it be soldiers in Palestine or Police in American Slums, the
message is the same. Obey or suffer.
But the tide is turning. The Working Class has begun to stir. Long
suffering men and women are beginning to understand that while the Ruling
Class has the guns, the Working Class has the power to bring the Empire to
its knees, simply by doing nothing. Just staying home, or under the bridges
and in the tent cities. Refusing to harvest the Master's crops or haul them
to market, or to build his mansions or glass towers, or march in his armies,
or patrol the streets and keeping the Ruling Classes laws.
But it will take understanding by all of those people who are bound to serve
the Empire's Rulers through the purchase of their loyalty and the promise of
a better life than that of the masses. They must understand that they
cannot serve the Masters and be Freemen.
Submitting to the Ruling Class demands obedience. All who serve this
monster will never be free. And they will never be truly safe.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
all-important.
Pillar writes: "There already shouldn't have been any doubt about the
orientation of the current Israeli government and the associated
obduracy of that government in blocking any path toward resolution of
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The government led by Benjamin
Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated by those opposed to the
relinquishing of occupied territory or the creation of a Palestinian
state."
Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu with Israel's new defense minister
Avigdor Lieberman. (photo: Getty)
Israel Veers Even Further Right
By Paul R. Pillar, Consortium News
26 May 16
Hillary Clinton says she wants to take the U.S.-Israeli relationship
"to the next level" even as Prime Minister Netanyahu's right-wing
regime plumbs new depths of extremism, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R.
Pillar notes.
here already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of
the current Israeli government and the associated obduracy of that
government in blocking any path toward resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The
government led by Benjamin Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated by
those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the
creation of a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu, who comes across as one of the more moderate members of his
own coalition, has paid more lip service than some other members of
that coalition to the idea of an eventual Palestinian state, but he
has made clear with other words and actions that he has no intention
of any such thing coming into being on his watch, or of taking any
meaningful steps toward such a state coming into being.
Now come reports that Netanyahu is offering the Defense Ministry to
former Moldovan nightclub bouncer (and resident of a West Bank
settlement) Avigdor Lieberman. This will bring into the ruling
coalition Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party, which even within the
Israeli context is usually described as "hard right."
Bringing Lieberman into the government is indicative not only of the
overall orientation of that government but also of some larger
disturbing trends in Israeli attitudes that the government has
fomented more than it has discouraged.
If Lieberman is made defense minister he would replace Moshe Ya'alon,
who in recent days has backed the Israeli military in prosecuting
(though only for manslaughter, not the murder that occurred) an
Israeli soldier who was caught on videotape shooting in the head, at
close range, a Palestinian man who was wounded and lying on the
ground, already subdued and obviously not a threat. Lieberman has
joined other hardliners in expressing support for the soldier.
(Netanyahu has visited the soldier's family to express sympathy.)
Netanyahu had been trying to recruit another coalition partner to
increase his government's thin majority in the Knesset. Talks with
centrist leader Isaac Herzog fell through; the government evidently
had more in common with the crude hard right tendencies of Lieberman.
Perhaps the timing of this latest political move was a natural outcome
of this sequence of negotiations.
Or maybe it was at least as much another example of Netanyahu's
proclivity for poking a stick in the eye of foreign leaders who look
like they might be getting on his case about the Palestinian conflict
- such as timing an announcement of more settlement expansion to
coincide with a visit of Vice President Biden. This time the stickee
is the French government, which is organizing an international
conference for later this year on Israeli-Palestinian peace.
All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman
coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind themselves
that this tragic and long-running conflict continues to run because
one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between the two sides is
One side, the occupying power - the side with the firepower - has themonths of the Obama administration.
ability to end the occupation and resolve the conflict if it decided
to do so. The other side has no such power. That other side, the
Palestinian side, has tried to use violent resistance but has
subsequently and correctly drawn the conclusion that such violence is
not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes legitimate
fears among Israelis about their security.
Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and
frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing
the first Israelis they can find. The Palestinian leadership has
turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts, is
about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does
everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is
trying to do now with the French initiative.
A common urge to sound impartial leads to the common refrain that the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists because neither side has the
political will to settle it. Nonsense. The overwhelming majority of
Palestinians do not want to continue to live under Israeli occupation.
They have the will but not the power to settle.
There certainly are divisions and political weakness on the
Palestinian side
- of which the Israeli government has striven to prevent any repair,
such as in "punishing" the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority
through withholding tax revenue whenever it has moved toward
reconciliation with Hamas - but there is no significant pro-occupation
party among Palestinians.
The hardliners who control Israel policy have the power but - as ample
evidence, even without Avigdor Lieberman, has shown - not the will, as
long as third parties do not make them suffer any meaningful
consequences. They do want the occupation to continue.
The Netanyahu government's repeated claim that it wants to negotiate
with the Palestinians should be described as the charade that it is.
It is understandable that Palestinian leaders have no desire to engage
in talks that have no prospect of leading to anything, when such
engagement would just mean participating in the charade while the
occupation continues and more facts are built on the occupied ground.
The insincerity is all the more obvious when Netanyahu speaks of talks
with "no preconditions" while at the same time insisting that the
Palestinians pronounce Israel to be a "Jewish state" - a precondition
that implicitly limits how the issue of Palestinian refugees and right
of return can be resolved, and also would mean the Palestinian
leadership formally signing on to a declaration that non-Jewish
Israelis are second-class citizens. Those are the only things such a
pronouncement would mean.
The Palestinian leadership long ago recognized, formally and
unequivocally, the state of Israel. As Palestinian leaders have noted,
that state is free to describe itself any way it wants.
With the American political system still wearing its usual
straitjacket on this issue, the main hope right now for taking any
steps out of this tragic situation lies with the French initiative. If
the United States is to do anything helpful any time in the
foreseeable future, it probably will have to come in the remaining eight
One of the two presumptive presidential nominees speaks of takinghttps://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/21/israel-veers-even-further-right/https:
U.S.-Israeli relations "to the next level" - and it is safe to assume
she doesn't mean that the next level will consist of imposing
consequences for the continued occupation.
The other presumptive presidential nominee caused nervous moments in
the Israel lobby when he talked about being impartial, but the nerves
were soothed with a speech to AIPAC that said all the "right" things.
And now he has Sheldon Adelson and Adelson's heavyweight bankroll on
his side, with everything that implies for this nominee's future
posture on Israel-related issues if he were to be elected.
________________________________________
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency,
rose to be one of the agency's top analysts. He is now a visiting
professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This article
first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest's Web site.
Reprinted with author's
permission.)
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu with Israel's new defense minister
Avigdor Lieberman. (photo: Getty)
//consortiumnews.com/2016/05/21/israel-veers-even-further-right/all-important.
Israel Veers Even Further Right
By Paul R. Pillar, Consortium News
26 May 16
Hillary Clinton says she wants to take the U.S.-Israeli relationship
"to the next level" even as Prime Minister Netanyahu's right-wing
regime plumbs new depths of extremism, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R.
Pillar notes.
here already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of
the current Israeli government and the associated obduracy of that
government in blocking any path toward resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The
government led by Benjamin Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated by
those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the
creation of a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu, who comes across as one of the more moderate members of his
own coalition, has paid more lip service than some other members of
that coalition to the idea of an eventual Palestinian state, but he
has made clear with other words and actions that he has no intention
of any such thing coming into being on his watch, or of taking any
meaningful steps toward such a state coming into being.
Now come reports that Netanyahu is offering the Defense Ministry to
former Moldovan nightclub bouncer (and resident of a West Bank
settlement) Avigdor Lieberman. This will bring into the ruling
coalition Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party, which even within the
Israeli context is usually described as "hard right."
Bringing Lieberman into the government is indicative not only of the
overall orientation of that government but also of some larger
disturbing trends in Israeli attitudes that the government has
fomented more than it has discouraged.
If Lieberman is made defense minister he would replace Moshe Ya'alon,
who in recent days has backed the Israeli military in prosecuting
(though only for manslaughter, not the murder that occurred) an
Israeli soldier who was caught on videotape shooting in the head, at
close range, a Palestinian man who was wounded and lying on the
ground, already subdued and obviously not a threat. Lieberman has
joined other hardliners in expressing support for the soldier.
(Netanyahu has visited the soldier's family to express sympathy.)
Netanyahu had been trying to recruit another coalition partner to
increase his government's thin majority in the Knesset. Talks with
centrist leader Isaac Herzog fell through; the government evidently
had more in common with the crude hard right tendencies of Lieberman.
Perhaps the timing of this latest political move was a natural outcome
of this sequence of negotiations.
Or maybe it was at least as much another example of Netanyahu's
proclivity for poking a stick in the eye of foreign leaders who look
like they might be getting on his case about the Palestinian conflict
- such as timing an announcement of more settlement expansion to
coincide with a visit of Vice President Biden. This time the stickee
is the French government, which is organizing an international
conference for later this year on Israeli-Palestinian peace.
All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman
coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind themselves
that this tragic and long-running conflict continues to run because
one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between the two sides is
One side, the occupying power - the side with the firepower - has themonths of the Obama administration.
ability to end the occupation and resolve the conflict if it decided
to do so. The other side has no such power. That other side, the
Palestinian side, has tried to use violent resistance but has
subsequently and correctly drawn the conclusion that such violence is
not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes legitimate
fears among Israelis about their security.
Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and
frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing
the first Israelis they can find. The Palestinian leadership has
turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts, is
about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does
everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is
trying to do now with the French initiative.
A common urge to sound impartial leads to the common refrain that the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists because neither side has the
political will to settle it. Nonsense. The overwhelming majority of
Palestinians do not want to continue to live under Israeli occupation.
They have the will but not the power to settle.
There certainly are divisions and political weakness on the
Palestinian side
- of which the Israeli government has striven to prevent any repair,
such as in "punishing" the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority
through withholding tax revenue whenever it has moved toward
reconciliation with Hamas - but there is no significant pro-occupation
party among Palestinians.
The hardliners who control Israel policy have the power but - as ample
evidence, even without Avigdor Lieberman, has shown - not the will, as
long as third parties do not make them suffer any meaningful
consequences. They do want the occupation to continue.
The Netanyahu government's repeated claim that it wants to negotiate
with the Palestinians should be described as the charade that it is.
It is understandable that Palestinian leaders have no desire to engage
in talks that have no prospect of leading to anything, when such
engagement would just mean participating in the charade while the
occupation continues and more facts are built on the occupied ground.
The insincerity is all the more obvious when Netanyahu speaks of talks
with "no preconditions" while at the same time insisting that the
Palestinians pronounce Israel to be a "Jewish state" - a precondition
that implicitly limits how the issue of Palestinian refugees and right
of return can be resolved, and also would mean the Palestinian
leadership formally signing on to a declaration that non-Jewish
Israelis are second-class citizens. Those are the only things such a
pronouncement would mean.
The Palestinian leadership long ago recognized, formally and
unequivocally, the state of Israel. As Palestinian leaders have noted,
that state is free to describe itself any way it wants.
With the American political system still wearing its usual
straitjacket on this issue, the main hope right now for taking any
steps out of this tragic situation lies with the French initiative. If
the United States is to do anything helpful any time in the
foreseeable future, it probably will have to come in the remaining eight
One of the two presumptive presidential nominees speaks of taking
U.S.-Israeli relations "to the next level" - and it is safe to assume
she doesn't mean that the next level will consist of imposing
consequences for the continued occupation.
The other presumptive presidential nominee caused nervous moments in
the Israel lobby when he talked about being impartial, but the nerves
were soothed with a speech to AIPAC that said all the "right" things.
And now he has Sheldon Adelson and Adelson's heavyweight bankroll on
his side, with everything that implies for this nominee's future
posture on Israel-related issues if he were to be elected.
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency,
rose to be one of the agency's top analysts. He is now a visiting
professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This article
first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest's Web site.
Reprinted with author's
permission.)
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
