Sharon Hughes of Changing World Views, a major radio program interviewed me, Ted Belman, on recent events in the ME and my article “The Conspiracy to Shrink Israel”.
Comments are closed.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
I guess I am the only one on my side of the table, even though we are all pretty much agreed on what impact American policy is having on Israel.
As to whether America has conspired with the Muslim world as Ted and others have contended to shrink Israel or have, in trying to shore up and advance their own interests, made accomodations and concessions to the Muslim world, often forcing Israel to pay for those concessions as I contend, is really a semantical dispute.
Conspiracy theorists have given otherwise credible people a bad name, when those credible people choose to frame their analysis by alleging a conspiracy. Their views, facts, arguments and logic are not addressed, but rather their opinions and analysis are summarily dismissed as stemming from a conspiracy theorist mentality. Such ad hominem attacks can be very successful.
I therefore have contended that in presenting facts, analysis and opinion on the harm that America appears to be doing to Israel as America pursues her own interests, one should be very leery about couching their views within the framework of an alleged conspiracy. There are other and better ways to make the point and not risk having one’s opinions summarily dismissed as being the work of a conspiracy theorist.
Given the adverse reaction that I have received to what I thought was my suggested common sense approach to analyzing and opining on these matters of mutual common concern, perhaps my suggested approach is not as common sensical as I thought.
I will have to think more on that.
I do want to make the observation however that if those who contend that America is involved in a conspiracy with elements of the Muslim world to shrink Israel or as one said, to destroy Israel, then why do we not hear such opinions from Israelis as a whole?
If Israel is being pressured by an American conspiracy as many here contend, to make self defeating, if not suicidal concessions to Palestinians, Arabs and many in the Muslim world are Israelis also being pressured to not tell the world that Israel is the victim of a conspiracy to shrink or destroy Israel, which conspiracy is between the West, including America and the Muslim world?
In other words are Israelis in the main frightened of accusing America as being part of conspiracy that intends to victimize Israel until Israel is no more?
Is it that those here on Israpundit who claim America is part of conspiracy smarter and more insightful then Israelis?
Is it that Israelis living in Israel while fearing as those here do, that America has and continues to pressure them to do or give up things that risks their very survival do not see America’s role in this as part of a conspiracy, but characterize America’s motivations otherwise?
Do Israelis who are on the front line have a better insight then we here on the sidelines do?
These are things for you and me to think about, don’t you think?
When we say “shrinking†it is almost synonymous with saying “destroying.â€
I agree. Shrinking a nation 8 miles wide is like putting an anorexic on a starvation diet.
I habitually use the royal “we”. But even so you are too restrictive.. I am speaking for all lovers of Zion who share our point of view. We are of one heart and mind. I do not want to separate myself from them.
Ted:
Enjoyed the interview enormously. But your use of first person plural “We” and first person plural possessive “Our” in describing Israel and its interests irks somewhat. For as long as we, friends and advocates of Israel and her cause, do not live in the Jewish state and share its citizens’ travails, the use of “They” and “Their,” or “Her” would be much more appropriate.
Best regards,
Scorpio
Ted, a marvellous interview and a great wake-up call. A job well done!
The internationalist Globalists who are covertly in league with the Islamofascists while simultaneously pretending to be defenders of “Western liberal humanitarian values and democracy”, are not only the enemies of Israel and the Jewish people, but also the entire civilized Western world.
We ignore this information at our peril.
BTW, You did a great job Ted. It was a change hearing the voice of someone you have only read for a long time.
The peace process is all you need to see, to know that they are out to get Israel. Never enforcing the terms of it, giving the Arabs a pass time and time again, making Israel keep paying for the same promise over and over again,, not allowing Israel to defend itself. One doesn’t have to be a genius to understand that they are out to get us.
Look at the Kosovo article today. And the Serbs have Russia on their side. They are out to do the same thing to Israel and Israel only has the American people to defend them.
When we say “shrinking” it is almost synonymous with saying “destroying.” This is true because as we know, shrinking Israel a key part of the process to dismantle the the Jewish state.
There is a mindset that goes mostly but not completely unspoken which looks at the creation of Israel as a mistake. The problem this anti-Israel crowd has is how to get the Israeli gene back into the bottle without causing an uproar or appearing to be antisemitic. It is true that a large part of the US public “gets it” and supports Israel in defending itself. This is one reason the so called “peace process” is always treated like it actually exists; it is to protect the Palestinian and Arab terrorists. The “process” is not just to keep Israel at bay, but the US public that is tired of terrorism in the M.E. and just wants the Israelis to take care of the problem.
However, it’s like having the referee step in every time the guy he wants to win the boxing match is about to be K.O. If Israel is to survive, at some point Israelis are going to have to ignore the bell and all of the refs from the US, EU, UN, and everywhere else.
There is no other way to win; for decades the match has been manipulated from outsiders and referees.
Bill is a prolific poster here, an intelligent guy, and a great advocate for Israel but if I didn’t know he was a lawyer… I would have no difficulty identifying him as such. For most of us, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is highly likely to be a duck. For Bill, it is necessary to bring in a zoologist from National Geographic to testify on the evidence supporting the determination of species.
Two years ago, I suggested here that there was an organized effort on the part of the US and the EU not just to “shrink” Israel but to systematically dismantle her. I pointed out that politically eviscerating a nation — particularly one born out of the ashes of the Holocaust and armed with nuclear weapons — is not an easy task or accomplished overnight. It requires finesse and heavy doses of subterfuge. Support for Israel in Congress and amongst the 60 million Christian evangelicals is too strong for even an accomplished Machiavellian like Bush to ignore. He cannot simply cut off military aid or financial assistance — though there were reports that he had prepared to curtail the shipment of military parts following Sharon’s “Israel will not be Czechoslovakia” speech in 1991.
Look at the facts on the ground: Bush was the first US president to officially call for a Palestinian state and sign off on the Saudi “peace plan” disguised as the Roadmap — despite Israel’s 14 written objections. The result was to validate and encourage Palestinian terrorism resulting in the highest Jewish civilian body count in Israeli history. Bush supported Hamas’ run in elections — despite Israel’s dire warning that they were likely to prevail. This has led us to the current debacle in Gaza where a genocidal gang of Islamic Nazis armed by Iran is preparing for their next foray. Even the Roadmap and US law have been neatly disposed of now with Bush openly financing and arming the alternative terrorists on Israel’s Eastern Front. A the same time, Egypt and the Saudis are supplied with the most advanced American military hardware even while the US “renegotiates” Israel’s qualitative edge. A blind eye is turned to the Saudi’s positioning of fighter jets within 100 miles of Eilat in contravention of all agreements.
The EU in the mean time, is bending over backwards to do business with Hamas and send hundreds of millions of Euros to the Pals. They simultaneously finance every Israeli NGO that actively seeks to subvert and weaken Jewish control over the Holy Land.
Bill always points out that every nation acts in its own best interest. This is true but it is also a straw man. It’s not necessary to envision a grand cabal directed against Israel. It is simply enough to recognize that in support of national interests which are sometimes identical, sometimes dissimilar, many powerful countries have come together and are actively working to “unwind” a Jewish sovereign state in the Middle East.
I agree with Ted on the conspiracy and it can be expanded beyond political power of the US, the EU, and the Arab states to include non-political entities such as global oil companies and other elitists who seek to establish what they believe would be a controlled and stable world. For example, Why is George Soros so anti-Israel to the point he has established a counter lobby to AIPAC? He surely wishes to shrink Israel.
The conspiracy to shrink Israel is driven by more than profits or US interests. It is an elitists mind-set that is obsessed with world management. It has taken root in a number of places and become so entrenched that it purges out nonconformist. This mindset has been at the core of the US State Department for many years.
I therefore, disagree will Bill to a degree, that the State Department is only moved by US interests. If that was all there was, why did Truman, and Nixon also go against their USSD advisers? Don’t US presidents have Americas interests at the forefront?
Bill, there is some truth in what you write, but it goes deeper. The US State Department has a notorious history of manipulation that is more driven by an agenda to control than it is to work for the best interests of the US.
Israel is seen as an obstacle to bringing the Arab states on board into a NEW World Order. Elitists believe that if Israel would just go away that they could work with Arab states and bring the radical elements of Islam under control.
Kissenger exemplifies this elitists mindset that wants to make the world manageable. At the World Affairs Council Press Conference, held at the Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel on April 19th 1994″ Kissenger stated,
Kissenger’s call for a “new global order†orchestrated by the world’s most powerful nations is not a new ambition. His work as an architect of a world system spans decades as affirmed in an address before the General Assembly of the United Nations in October of 1975 when he stated,
This is how the US State Department thinks up until today. Is it any wonder that Israel is seen as the problem?
This is part of an agenda, not just people acting on US interests.
Bill, in your rush to take me on you neglected to read me clearly. Your reference to “conspiracy theories” and “alleged conspiracies”, doesn’t pass muster. When Kissinger clearly describes an alliance or an agreement between the US and the Arabs to shrink Israel which is articulated in secret, that is a conspiracy not an alleged conspiracy and not a conspiracy theory.
Having said that, I fully accept that the Us has entered such an alliance or agreement to serve their self interest. Nothing wrong with that. That’s what makes the world go round. But to do it in secret and to present a different face to the American people and Israel is duplicitous and fraudulent.
As for optics, are you suggesting that making such a case makes for bad optics and therefore shouldn’t be made. I disagree. If the US government is lying, the truth must come out.
Your comment replies to my first point, though I still disagree with your characterization as to the motivations of the Americans and prefer mine.
Your comment however ignores my second point about the poor optics of building a case around an alleged conspiracy which I believe is equally important and quite distinct from the first point. Those optics can raise questions in respect of and thereby undermine an otherwise unassailable argument.
It is best therefore to avoid resorting to allegations of conspiracy in relation to facts cited. Make the case and let the facts speak for themselves. If it is indeed a conspiracy, the reader should be astute enough to draw that conclusion for themselves.
It is not necessary that the reader conclude your targeted person or administration is party to a conspiracy, so long as they are persuaded that the person or administration was justly targeted.
I didn’t get the chance to expand on the conspiracy so focused on what I think the US is trying to do.
But my article and interview clearly shows its a conspiracy between the Arab countries represented by the Iraqi Foreign Minister and Kissinger. I say his interview discloses the conspiracy.
Did not America collude with the Arabs to shrink Israel. Similarly the Europeans also colluded with the Arabs to the same end.
Good interview Ted, but…….
I very much disagree with you in form and substance on your characterizing American efforts to achieve a balance in the Middle East between Israel on the one hand and the Muslim nations on the other as a conspiracy to shrink Israel.
A conspiracy denotes two or more parties working in concert towards realizing an untoward purpose, usually meaning causing harm or the destruction of another party.
Just who is America conspiring with in the classical sense of a conspiracy?
You rightly noted that the American public is largely supportive of Israel. It is certainly not the American public therefore that is part of any conspiracy.
You point to the American State Department as being the party that seeks to harm Israel. Again, in the classical sense of the meaning of conspiracy, just who is the American State Department conspiring with?
I have been as critical as you about the American State Department and of successive American Presidents and their administrations including the present one as regards instances when American policies stated and actions taken including pressuring Israel, have sought to push Israel into a position predictably fraught with grave risk to Israel or into a position that compromises Israel’s ability to defend herself including preventing Israel from decisively beating her enemies, be it Hezbollah, the Palestinians, the Egyptians or Syria.
Though I equally share your concerns over these issues of American administrations acting in a way that compromises Israel’s interests, I hesitate to say that America is conspiring to harm Israel, because that is simply not true.
Successive American State Departments have had a bias against Israel, but that was not necessarily due to generations of members and leaders of the American State Department or American administrations being anti-Semitic, though as regards certain individuals serving at the State Department or in the Administration over the years, that is a conclusion one is certainly drawn to.
Rather, as I have long contended successive American State Departments and American administrations are moved by their perceptions of American self interest and the desire to ensure that American self interests are looked after.
To state the obvious, America has important material interests in the Middle East as regards a number of matters, one being Arab oil. To deal just with America’s interest in oil, America’s material interest is to ensure a reliable source of supply at an affordable price. In order to ensure that, America must give the Arabs something that they want besides money to pay for that oil.
The American administrations know full well that one of the things that a very great many Arabs and indeed the a very great many Muslims in the Middle East want is to see Israel weakened, if not eliminated altogether. As disgusting as Muslim racist Jew hatred is, it is a reality that America must contend with. That fact was brought home to America and the EU during the Arab oil boycott in 1973. That economic pain of those days is still not forgotten.
Since Israel overcame all odds in 1948 and not only survived, but thrived, Americans and their government have developed an increasingly close relationship that can be characterized as one of friend and ally. Before you get concerned by my use of the word friend to characterize America’s relationship with Israel, be mindful that I have previously noted that the word friend in the geopolitical realm does not mean the same thing as what one understands of that word between individuals.
America has thus been forced into a situation where they must try to strike a balance between their interests vis a vis the Muslim Middle East and Israel, given the conflicting interests between both Israel and the Muslim Middle East.
That balance that America seeks too often seems tipped in favor of the Muslim Middle East and against Israel.
Further and just as importantly, I am against characterizing America’s policies and actions aforesaid that brings harm or potential harm to Israel as being driven by a conspiracy, because of the bad optics of so characterizing the situation thusly.
Today conspiracy theories are running rampant and those that advocate views based on alleged conspiracies immediately undermine their own credibility by draping themselves in a pall of suspicion that their views, regardless of how well articulated are based on the feet of conspiracy theory clay.
For one to attribute the American policies and actions, either eminating from the American administration or their State Department that that harm or could potentially harm Israel as a conspiracy, has the effect therefore of undermining one’s one’s credibility.
Without having to resort to alleging a conspiracy between successive American administrations and American State departments on the one hand and some vague co-conspirator, it is in my view much more effective to attack American policies and actions that harm or cause potential harm to Israel on their own merits or demerits including attacking such policies and actions by showing the American public that their leaders are acting contrary to the will of the American people who do support Israel.
Ted: You are a great educator and, in my case, I have learned a lot that I did not know before reading your articles and Israpundit. Please keep up the excellent job you are doing. This interview is one of your best. Thanks, Gary