Protocol Of The Idiots Of Zion

There was a time when the accusation of someone being like a Nazi was thrown left and right at those whom the Zionist Lobby did not like until the public got tired of hearing the same refrain repeated over and over again. The mood of the people had taken a turn whereby to call someone a Nazi was to raise the Nazis to the level of that someone rather than lower the person to the level of the Nazis. And where the word Nazi used to be synonymous with the devil, it slowly came to mean almost a Saint.

When the people went further than that and started to say if this is Nazism let’s have more of it not condemn it, the Zionists ran around looking for a new way by which to intimidate their opponents. At first, they fashioned a personal accusation to fit every individual they wished to attack by digging up the dirt on them and using it. This is how they assassinated the character of a number of good people but when this proved to be a costly and time consuming exercise requiring them to do endless research, they looked for another solution. They came up with an overarching accusation they could quickly throw at someone and keep him or her pinned down until they completed a made-to-order plan of attack. That overarching accusation was the infamous anti-Semitic label.

The new regime worked for a while because most of the time it was ordinary folks who wished to discuss something they saw and were touched by. And these down to earth folks tried to limit the discussion to a situation they understood well and could relate to. For example if someone was moved by the sight of an Israeli tank crushing the home of a Palestinian family, they tried to speak about this act alone without going on a tangent. But the Zionist propaganda machine got into high gear every time and responded "in the name of balance" with grand discussions such as when they chided the Mufti of Jerusalem for urging the Palestinians to find a safe place where to take their children. This alone, said the Zionists was reason enough for Israeli tanks to demolish Palestinian homes today. Huh! What? Run this by me again.

Of course, the intent of the propaganda machine in taking complicated approaches to discussing simple observations was to give itself a platform from which to spew the fiction it created on the spot to suit the moment and confuse the interlocutor. These were distorted stories mixed with a twisted logic through which the Zionists tried to equate every ounce of legitimate right owed to the Palestinians with a hundred tons of fabricated rights that the Zionists said were owed to the Jewish newcomers. And anyone who did not see things in this light were blinded by anti-Semitism, they charged.

And so, the ordinary folks who started the discussion by saying it was inhuman for Israeli tanks to crush Palestinian homes found themselves at a loss when it came to tackling madness of this magnitude. Seeing how useless and futile the whole exercise had become, they gave up speaking on the subject, an outcome that the Zionists were praying for.

It then became inevitable that the public speak out, not about the situation in the Middle East anymore because the facts were speaking for themselves by then but about the comportment of the Zionists. This was, after all, a society which prides itself on a system of fairness but the Zionist Lobby was ferociously attacking everyone who dared to say something it did not like. And so the Zionists decided to pull from their sleeve the ace card and to play it. They accused their opponents of doing what the Protocol of the Elders of Zion did in an earlier era.

This Protocol is a document which some people believe is genuine but the Zionists say is a forgery. In fact, it does not matter whether it is one or the other. The essential point here is that the Zionists admit they are accused now of what they were accused before. But what these people fail to understand is that they cannot get sympathy from the public because someone saw the Elders of Zion in a certain light a long time ago and someone else sees the modern Zionists in that same light today.

They also reject the notion that the resemblance between the two situations does not invalidate the historical description but validates both the historical and the present descriptions. In this rejection, they fail to see that a recidivist cannot cry foul because he was accused of the same crime before. Moreover, in drawing attention to the parallel between the past and the present, he demonstrates that the second accusation has a precedent and therefore is likely to be well founded.

The full name of that document is "The Protocols of the learned elders of Zion". Those elders of the past may well have been learned and they should be given the benefit of the doubt. The present elders, however, do not deserve to be thought of as their equals. In fact, the present crop of individuals in charge of the Zionist propaganda machine must be stupid to the extreme because when they attack and destroy the reputation of honorable people, they leave behind a paper trail which will be compiled someday into a dandy sort of document. And this document will have earned the title: "Protocol of the idiots of Zion" which they are.

Mission Creep Designed By Creeps

This article was conceived at a time when all the mouthpieces of the Israel-Zionist Lobby were let loose in America to pave the way for sending American boys and girls to kill the people of Darfur and be killed by their Sudanese brothers and sisters. The article later appeared in the September 11, 2007 edition of Sada Al Mashrek, a trilingual newspaper published in Montreal, Canada. Whether or not the article caused a few people to back away from the edge of the precipice will be determined by history.

________________________________

At long last the American Administration has realized it was caught in a situation termed Mission Creep in Iraq. Have these people finally been enlightened? Perhaps, but we must remain cautious because coming to the threshold of the age of enlightenment does not necessarily mean they will walk into it and embrace the new realities. In fact, there are indications that what sent the Americans into Iraq is preparing to send them into Sudan where they will repeat the same tragedy one more time.

The American people were surprised to learn what happened to them in Iraq because normally, people slide into a bad situation by accident, realize they made a mistake and step back quickly. But what happened here is that the brass at the Pentagon did not realize they made a mistake until they could no longer step back and avoid a catastrophe. The history of the adventure suggests they were sucked into a mission creep that deliberately placed them into a situation where they could not go forward or go backward trying to reach a goal that was badly defined by design. What is going on in here?

What is going on is that the mission in Iraq was designed for another purpose, one that was kept hidden from the American people. Those who designed it sat in the boardrooms of the Likud Party in Israel and the Zionist Lobby in New York. They decided on a plan and lied to the American government, the military and the public about their intentions. They disguised these intentions by questioning the motives of everyone else and they seized on every opportunity to create fantasies like the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, among other things. And then they pushed America into a war whose aim was to realize an old dream of the Zionist establishment, that of an Israel extending from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Had the American ruling establishment opened their eyes to look at reality and cleared their ears to listen to the voices of reason, they would have realized they were being prepared for a mission that was none of their business. The first thing that should have hit them in the face was a notion which made its debut in Britain shortly after the fall of Communism to the effect that the Arabs and the Muslims were unable to move forward to modernity or move backward to their glorious past but were stuck in a present that was going nowhere. This is how the Lobby paved the way for what was to come.

But because they were missing the ingredients of wisdom and experience, the ruling establishment in Washington failed to see what was coming. In fact, the truly enlightened would have known that when the Zionist Lobby accuses someone of something, it means that the Lobby is preparing to do that very thing to the sucker who would listen to it. America listened to the Zionist Lobby and America is now unable to move forward or move backward in Iraq as it has been sucked into a quagmire from which there will be no honorable exit.

The second thing that should have hit the American ruling establishment in the face was the visit of Prime Minister Shamir of Israel to America during which time he urged them to prepare for war against the Arabs and Islam with a cry he delivered in his East European Yiddish accent: "Zey know nossing about za damacracy."

The truly enlightened know that when a kibbutz dwelling descendant of Karl Marx calls on you to help social engineer the lives of others, you do not obey the evildoer but buy him a one way ticket and send the creep back to where he came from before you get hurt and leave a legacy for your descendants to curse you by.

And now that the American military is about to be defeated on the Euphrates side of the map, the Zionist Lobby is preparing it to try again on the Nile side in Sudan. In fact, the Lobby would fight to the last man, woman and child in America and would fight to the last dollar in the American treasury to realize the dream of a greater Israel even if the odds were one in a hundred that they might succeed.

This is why it is imperative at this time for the rest of us to say it loudly and clearly that: you have been warned, America. Do it once and shame on the Zionist Lobby, do it twice and no one will shed a tear as you rot in the sands of the Middle East and East Africa.

The Zionist Hate Of American Freedom

This time the Zionists are attacking Joel Kovel, the University of Michigan Press and Pluto Books. Again they are behaving as if the whole world was their oyster with no one else to share it with them. They behave as if they were accountable to no one but their inner voices which tell them to go ahead and have it all because no one will dare to stand in their way.

Anyone who is familiar with the writings of Joel Kovel and who reads my articles would realize how far apart we are on some of the issues facing the World today. But here I am engaged in an activity the purpose of which is to advocate that Joel Kovel be left alone to reach out to his audience and to speak freely without being harassed. And I am certain he would do the same for me, as indeed we would both do for anyone who may come under the kind of attacks he is enduring today.

Here is what Mr. Roger Zwanenberg, Chairman and Editor of Pluto Books says in an open letter published by The Palestine Chronicle:

"About three weeks ago Pluto books and the University of Michigan Press - our US distributor - came under attack by Stand With Us (a Zionist lobby group) who were objecting to the publication of Overcoming Zionism by Joel Kovel which resulted in the book being withdrawn in the US. The vitriolic attack questioned the University's relationship with Pluto generally and denigrated Overcoming Zionism. Since then the Executive Board of the University has considered the matter and issued a public statement. Joel's book has now been reinstated but they plan to review the ongoing relationship between Pluto and UMP in October. Pluto Press's importance and presence in the US is under threat."

We face two important points when we encounter an issue of this kind. The first point is that it is normal for someone to promote their interest or to defend themselves against a perceived threat. Thus we should not be surprised that a Zionist Lobby called Stand With Us felt threatened by a book called Overcoming Zionism and tried to do something about it. The second point flows out of the first because it asks three relevant questions: What should they be allowed to do? What should they be forbidden from doing? Indeed what should anyone be allowed to do or be forbidden from doing when defending their interests?

Things are done differently under different regimes of governance. We live in a democracy and the rules that govern the way we communicate with each other as citizens or as commercial entities are collectively called freedom of speech, of assembly and of association. They are represented by the icon that is the First Amendment of the American Constitution even to those of us who do not live in the United States.

When people sit around a table and speak freely with each other, they are governed by rules which are duplicated in the public arena. For example, I cannot use a noise making device to disrupt someone at the table who says something I do not like. Similarly, I cannot use a megaphone such as the facilities that are at the disposal of the Zionists to disrupt someone in the public arena. Also, if two individuals at the table coordinate their efforts and speak with one voice, I cannot force them to end their arrangement. And neither can someone like the Zionist Lobby force two commercial entities such as Pluto and UMP to break their arrangement.

Yet this is what happens every time someone says something that goes contrary to what the Israel-Zionist establishment likes to hear. To do this, they whip up an ad hoc group for the occasion, they give it a name such as Stand With Us which suits the current circumstances, they disrupt the dialogue between people and they threaten the commercial relationship such as they are now doing with Pluto and the university press.

Have they gone so far now that we should invoke the law ourselves and put an end to these activities? The answer is yes they have gone far. And we know this to be the case because our legal system is based on the Common Law which derives its legitimacy from the precedents that were set at an earlier time. And there are at least three precedents which can be invoked here.

First, Canada stood up to The US - its most important ally and commercial partner - when the latter tried to force American Companies operating in Canada to deal with Cuba according to US laws and not Canadian laws.
Second, at the behest of that same Israel-Zionist Lobby, America passed laws which prohibit companies from being influenced by the Arab boycott of Israel.
Third, Canada’s province of Ontario, under the Premiership of Bob Rae who has a close and intimate relationship with the Canadian Jewish Congress, passed a similar law.

Consequently, if American or Canadian companies cannot tailor their behavior with regard to a foreign country to honor the laws of another foreign country then surely, no interest of a foreign country such as Israel can take precedent over the fundamental rights of freedom that the American and Canadian citizens enjoy. Nor can the interests of Israel be rated higher than the right of American and Canadian companies that establish commercial relations among themselves.

In consideration of the aforementioned, the University of Michigan Press should therefore be put on notice that knuckling under the Israel-Zionist blackmail would violate American law and shall be prosecuted to the fullest extent of said law.

The point has been made over and over again that the threat to Western Civilization comes from the ad hoc terrorist groups of youngsters who are brought together by a freedom hating organization called Al Qaeda, a name that means The Base. It is further said that these youngsters would sacrifice their own lives to destroy the freedom of others, yet no one has ever produced a youngster who would admit to this.

By contrast, the stated and often repeated purpose of the ad hoc groups which are put together by the Zionist Base is to destroy the right of Americans and Canadians to speak to each other and to disrupt the commercial relations between their companies. And if the Zionist groups would not go as far as die for their cause, they are willing to destroy the livelihoods of others, those like Joel Kovel who wish to exercise their right to think and to publish as free citizens.

There is no doubt that Western Civilization is under attack from without by the Al Qaeda Base and from within by the Zionist Base. What we must keep in mind, however, is that no country or empire has ever perished by a few kids blowing themselves up as they take down a building or two. By contrast, mighty empires have disintegrated when they were "eaten up" from within by what controlled them when they neglected to control it.

Who's Afraid Of The Virgin Wolf

Another American institution, this time the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul Minnesota, has canceled a previous engagement by someone who was to speak on Palestine and the Middle East because some obscure group did not like that someone and complained about the upcoming speaking engagement. And the would be speaker was none other than Bishop Desmond Tutu whose fight against apartheid is legendary.

Let’s be honest with ourselves, the proverbial straw has now broken the camel’s back and we cannot avoid asking the question: How did freedom of speech deteriorate so much and so fast in a nation that accuses others of hating freedom then sends her sons and daughters to kill those freedom haters in order to shove her brand of freedom down the throat of those who survive the slaughter?

And we cannot help but to answer the question by observing that it all began one fateful day when Israel and the Zionist Lobby were made to look like the invincible children of God. It was June 5, 1967 when Israel launched a spectacular sneak attack on its Middle Eastern neighbors and thus started a six year war that ended with the kicking of Israel out of the Egyptian Sinai and half the Syrian Golan in 1973. The attrition and the counteroffensive that followed the initial battle succeeded despite the massive military help that Israel received from America and the NATO allies even as the final counteroffensive was progressing.

But the falsification of history continues in America where they speak of the six day battle in 1967 as if it were the entire war but do not speak of the six year war which ran from 1967 to 1973. And the reason for the falsification is to maintain the image of an invincible Israel in the mind of the politicians and journalists who wield the powers of the nation, yet believe in a fiction that is an oddball mix of religious mythology and pagan superstition. In turn these beliefs motivate the actions of these politicians and journalists to whom the Zionist Lobby dictates like a master dictates to children.

It is no wonder therefore that the Zionists will do anything to maintain the sort of climate where nonsense can sprout and flourish. And they do not do it by being persuasive through civilized debate the way things are supposed to be done in a democracy, but by the skillful use of demagoguery and blackmail which they communicate through whispers and deliver behind closed doors by a group such as the one that agitated to ban Bishop Tutu. And it is the relentless duplication of this little game that enabled the Zionist Lobby over the years to take hold of the American system and to control the nation.

And when the Zionists came to the realization that Israel was never able to duplicate the success of 1967, they saw the need to involve America deeply in the wars of the Middle East with the disastrous consequence that we see today in Iraq and the potential for more to come. In fact, except for the cowardly murder of Palestinian families by the air force in the middle of the night as they sleep in their beds, Israel lost every combat after 1967 even when she went against a tiny force, be it a Palestinian force or a Lebanese one. And this situation developed because Israel was never able to mount another sneak attack on neighbors who learned to keep their eyes open after 1967 knowing that the Israeli wolf is roaming their neighborhood looking for easy prey.

This is still a virgin wolf which is being fed by the Zionist Lobby through an umbilical cord that extends deep into the arteries of America’s military, financial, political and informational organs. And the more the parasitic wolf sucks the life out of the American body, the hungrier it gets and the more the Lobby demands from the host. And while the nations of the Middle East are growing confident that the wolf has gone as far as it can in their neighborhood, the American public is becoming increasingly concerned at the power that is being transferred to the Zionists and the wealth that is sent to Israel, all at their expense and without their consent.

And when you add to this the potential that exists to drag America into more disastrous adventures in the Middle East, you can appreciate the concern that the American people have with regards to the direction in which they are being led abroad and the effect of that on the home front. And there is no doubt that this concern is well founded. In fact, the harder the Lobby fights the notion that it has acquired too much power, the more it demonstrates how much power it has acquired, and the cancellation of Bishop Tutu’s appearance is a stark manifestation of the misuse of this power.

This sort of thing happens because to fight a legitimate concern that is articulated through debate, you either take the democratic route and prove the concern to be unfounded or you kill the debate before it takes place through physical means such as blackmail or demagoguery which are the tools of autocratic systems. And these are the tools that the Zionist Lobby has perfected to a high degree and has used with great skill in America and a few other places.

The wolf is now entering puberty and it is developing needs which will multiply and cause it to ravage the places it can tackle safely. Realizing that the Middle East is becoming a difficult place to abuse, the wolf will turn to the places where it has been tolerated and nurtured, and where it developed an existence that depends on everyone else. These are the English speaking countries in general, and the United States of America specifically. For these reasons and for the reason that the beast is growing fast and getting hungrier, America should be afraid of the Virgin Wolf and must develop a strategy to cope with the situation.

Indications are that the beast will remain isolated from the rest of society for a while, and a lone wolf is more dangerous than a social one but the bet is that things will then change to a situation that is even worse. Still a virgin but not for much longer, the wolf must be tamed now before it seeks a mate to form a pack inside of which it will feel safe again and become more daring than ever before. And the way to tame a wolf is to speak loudly and clearly without fearing the consequences. Not only this, but the time has come for the table to be turned. The hunter must now become the hunted because the wolf must be caught and put in a cage for all to see that you can abuse humanity only so much before humanity puts an end to your abuse.

A good place to start the testing of this strategy is with the matter of Bishop Tutu’s appearance at the University of St. Thomas. Because there is not a clear law to deal with a situation such as this, the matter should be taken to court by a group of concerned citizens on the basis that their right to free association and assembly has been violated by the University which responded to blackmail.

At the same time, a massive push must begin in America to recognize that the founding fathers dealt with the subject of freedom of speech in the First Amendment and not the second, the tenth or any other because they regarded free speech as paramount. And when the founding fathers prohibited the Congress itself from legislating something that would abridge that right, what gives the Zionist Lobby or any group it creates the right to legislate from the streets and to abridge the right of Americans to speak freely or to hear someone they invited to come and talk to them? Who or what gives the Zionist Lobby this right?

When people know what the law says, they can defy it if they wish, even go to jail to stand up for their principles as some journalists have to do once in a while. These people know they will have their day in court, get a fair hearing and in the end be condemned or vindicated. In the first instance, they will realize how foolish they were or, in the second instance, the public will realize how heroic they have been. But when the law is made in the streets, the intention here is to create a sense of fear and self censorship because you know you will never have your day in court. You stand to lose your career, your reputation and your livelihood because you can do nothing but sit and watch your own destruction and the destruction of your family, unable to move a finger to help yourself or turn to someone for assistance. You will be alone with the wolf on his turf helpless like a Palestinian child who is trying to stop an Israeli tank from destroying the family home with nothing more than a stone in his tiny hand and tears in his eyes. And so, you knuckle under and you hide your shame by pretending that all is well and nothing rotten is going on.

And this is the freedom that America is killing others so as to force them to love, to worship and to adopt. Not on your life, America. Not on your life.

The Lesson Of Sabra And Shatila

Is America at risk of becoming Israel’s new Phalangist movement? Is America becoming the new Evil Empire? Or is it that America is possessed by an evil spirit that can be shaken off? The Phalangists were Israel’s Christian allies during its occupation of Southern Lebanon in the Nineteen Eighties and were responsible for the unspeakable atrocities which were committed against the Palestinian people at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.

The Evil Empire was the name that a speechwriter of President Ronald Reagan gave the former Soviet Union. Both the Phalangists and the Soviet Union have now disappeared but their legacy may linger on for a time to come because someone seems determined to make America wear the mantle of these two movements. To see how and why this can be, I must begin with the definition of the words evil and empire.

There are probably as many definitions of evil as there are individuals in this world but a survey of the various philosophies that preceded our time shows there is agreement among them on one point, the worst of all evils is that which disguises itself as a do-gooder to infiltrate the good and turn it into a bad thing from within. In other words, the worse the evil the more it is careful not to be seen doing bad deeds but labors to tempt someone else to do them.

The question, therefore, should be posed like this: Does America tempt other nations or individuals to do evil? The answer is yes, America does that but there is a caveat. America commits evil not because there is something intrinsically evil about her but because she is possessed by an evil spirit that uses her as a tool. This makes America look like a partner to evil when in fact she has no say in what is decided. Who would have thought that the Lebanese, be they Christian or Muslim could have committed crimes such as those at Sabra and Shatila? They could never have done it were it not for the Israeli ruling class which used them as a tool in the same way that the evil spirit is using America today.

As for the definition of the word empire, to be an empire you must have a monolithic population whose members would be willing to settle in the lands you conquer. But America is the opposite of this in that people come from other countries to settle within her borders. Therefore, she could not be an empire in the traditional sense.

So then, what is this evil spirit which is in possession of America? It is a group of people with a deadly ideology. They have come to be known as the Neocons, and their ideology is the spirit which inspires the commission of bad deeds. In their eagerness to spread their influence everywhere, these people infested the politico-military establishment of America then infested and used the politico-journalistic establishment to promote the idea of a Pax Americana through which they aspired to bend the world to their will. Had Pax Americana succeeded as a scheme, the Neocons would have succeeded in turning America into an evil empire that would be doing to the World what Israel did to Sabra and Shatila in the Nineteen Eighties. However, lacking the fundamentals to become an empire, America never achieved the hoped for status.

What happened during the Neocon experiment was that America went on a rampage in the Middle East and elsewhere causing considerable damage to property and to institutions but failed in everything else. The evil was there to be sure because the Neocons did tempt other nations and individuals to follow their lead, but the empire was never there. Taking all that into account, the definition which best describes America today is that of a failed empire possessed by the evil ideology of the Neocons. The question now is whether or not this evil can be shaken off. To answer the question we need to understand how that evil relates to the rest of the nation.
As the name implies, the Neocons are new conservatives which means they are turncoat liberals. There are two reasons why these people converted from one political stripe to another. The first and foremost reason was that they wanted to control America’s might so as to implement a plan that was even more ambitious. The second reason was the advent of Ronald Reagan who talked derisively about card carrying liberal members of the ACLU, meaning the American Civil Liberties Union. This kind of talk greatly amused the American public but it scared the would-be Neocons out of their ACLU T-shirts. They replaced the T-shirts with a suit and a tie, turned their coats inside out, embraced the conservative ideology and defended it with the same fervor they wore when they defended the liberal ideology of the ACLU.

The question still stands: Can America get rid of these Neocons and erase their sick ideology? The answer is yes, this can happen because nothing stays the same. There is not, for example, one movement or one ideology that is more than a hundred years old. When something vanishes then returns, as it sometimes happens, that something returns in a different form. For example, there were the Nazis then came the neo-Nazis. But what would the neo-cons be called if they were to vanish then come back? Whatever name they choose for themselves, they will have mutated to suit a new environment.

What is certain to change is America’s ability to even contemplate being an empire. The days when America was considered a relevant superpower are gone forever thanks to the activities of the Neocons. They depleted America of every moral, military and economic standing it had in the World and left it as bankrupt as the Zionist ideology is today. The spirit of evil may still be there, however, and still at work in America. In fact, the worry is that the tendency to do evil will increase as America’s power declines further and the Neocons become increasingly more desperate.

A good question to ask now is this: What can we do as citizens of the World to make sure that America’s anticipated decline will not lead to other accusations of " Weapons of Mass Destruction," other Abu Ghraibs and other Guantanamos? The answer is that we must talk about the possibility of this happening, warn others about it and be eternally vigilant as we watch for developments that can lead to such outcomes.

The Stone And The Glasshouse

Palestine will forever be known as the stone that began the process to bring down the glasshouse of Zion. It happened because those who live in the house have been throwing stones at everyone else and no one dared to respond until Palestine came along and said enough of this nonsense, then proceeded to shatter the glasshouse.

The nonsense is to the effect that the Israeli-Zionist Lobby, which owns the glasshouse and lives in it, was able thus far to hide the content of a house whose walls are made of mirrors and whose rooms are filled with smoke blowers and hot air generators, with double-talk and theatrical pieces. These are the props and the scripts that allow the house dwellers to act out the cry of a victim even as they victimize their Palestinian neighbors. Aimed at securing a gush of American aid to Israel whether or not the aid is needed, the scheme has worked well in the sense that the Lobby was able to siphon off massive loads of treasure from the American treasury.

How all this was accomplished is encapsulated in this one sentence: "I command you not to believe that I am in command here." This is what the Israeli-Zionist Lobby says to those who dare to point out that the Lobby has gathered enough power to block any venue where the lobby’s power may be discussed and perhaps challenged. Thus, no system of checks and balances was ever developed to contain the Lobby whose power then grew to become absolute, a power that is now utilized to persecute and to crush those who challenge the Lobby’s activities.

And persecution is what happened to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt not long ago when they were blocked on a few occasions from discussing a book they wrote under the title: The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. What these Americans say in their book is that the Lobby has become so powerful, it practically commands US foreign policy, a situation that cannot be healthy for America or Israel. The response of the Lobby was such that it proved to be not only in command of US foreign policy but also in charge of guarding the right to free speech, a right that the Lobby hands out exclusively to its supporters. Free speech used to be a right that belonged to all Americans by virtue of the First Amendment of the Constitution but is now monopolized by the Zionists who use it to buy friends and recruit followers.

This insanity was not invented yesterday. Its roots go back thousands of years to the Book of Esther when the Jews considered the Amalekites the enemy that must be wiped off the face of the Earth. Not only this but the Jews were also told: the Amalekite men and women, their babies and youngsters, their oxen and sheep must not be talked about in public so as not to utter the word Amalekite during a conversation.

This must have been the first act of censorship and blacklisting ever commanded by someone and observed by their followers. But that is not the end of the matter because later, there came throughout the Talmud that the Arabs were the descendants of the Amalekites and they must be treated in the prescribed manner. Later still, the rabbis added to the blacklist and the hate list, the gentile men and women that the rabbis would designate as enemies of the day, and those Jews who question the wisdom of the Zionist movement.

As to the methods by which you kill the enemy, ways are suggested on how to provoke a war during which you kill if you can or get someone to kill for you. But if for one reason or another you cannot secure the death of an enemy, you assassinate their character and thus destroy their life just the same. You do this by unleashing a secret campaign of whispers against them, and when they become aware of what you are doing, you blacklist them and then ban them from the public arena lest they unmask you and put an end to your activities. These are the ancient instructions that the Israeli-Zionist Lobby is enforcing in this Twenty First Century.

However, it was not long ago that some Jews were criticized by gentiles and Jews alike such as Woody Allen for engaging in the production and dissemination of pornographic material. The response of the pornographers was that such criticism constituted a form of censorship. They defended their activities by pointing out that the Nazis "burned" the books they did not like, an act that ultimately led to the Holocaust and the extermination of million of Jews. Yet, not one howl, one hiss or one murmur came from the Israeli-Zionist Lobby to denounce this sort of talk or to dissociate themselves from a notion that places the right of Jews not to be exterminated on the same level as the right of someone to peddle pornography.

And now, it is this same Lobby which is "burning" the books of those Jews and gentiles who conclude that America has given too much to Israel already, and that the giving is hurting the American people more than it does Israel any good. And this is so, they explain, because the return to Israel is being diminished by the fact that a handful of Palestinian youngsters armed with no more than a stone or two are able to stand up to the best weapon systems that the American military industrial complex can produce.

The point was made repeatedly by writers, psychologists and thinkers of the past that the victims of a horrible event are the most likely to engage in the sort of behavior from which they suffered themselves. If this is what the Israeli-Zionist Lobby represents today, we must recognize it as such, call it a disease that is an extension of the Nazi disease and handle it with care. We must do this or people will conclude as they are beginning to do so now that Zionism and Nazism are but the two sides of the same coin. Left unattended, this situation may well deteriorate to the point where people will want to deal with Zionism in the most careless of manners as if Hitler had come back to life. And the result will not be a pretty thing to watch.
In any case, the Palestinian youngsters who stood up to the Israeli tanks will forever be remembered as the little Davids who defeated not only the Israelis but also the mighty American Goliath considering how much Goliath has nurtured Israel. With or without a statue to honor them, the Palestinian youngsters already stand tall, and they stand on the highest pedestal of all in the hearts and the minds of millions of people the World over.

And to think that the Palestinians have achieved this level of success despite the fact that the American media almost entirety observed the command to ban and to blacklist everything Arab is to look at a miracle in the face. To paraphrase the Book of Ester, their men and women, their babies and youngsters, their oxen and sheep were not talked about in public so as not to utter the word Arab on the air except in a derogatory manner. But the Palestinian cause was so powerful and so far reaching, it transcended the apathy of those whose mandate is to fight apathy but chose instead to bury their heads in the sand for fear of the Israeli-Zionist Lobby.
What a sick and sickening situation this was! What a house of horror the Zionist glasshouse turned out to be! And what a relief to know that a stone or two in the hand of a child can end a horror story that has been in the making for thousands of years! There is hope for mankind yet, and the children of Palestine are it.

Mr. Blair Goes To The Middle East

This article was first published in Sada Al Mashrek, a trilingual newspaper published in Montreal, Canada.
________________________________

Former Prime Minister of Britain, Tony Blair has been appointed troubleshooter by the Quartet made of the EU, the US, the UN and Russia to deal with the problem of Israel’s occupation of Palestine. I submit that Mr. Blair has listened long enough to the Jewish Lobby and that it is time he listens to other voices if he wants to avoid repeating the tragedy he helped to create in Iraq.

Given the intractability of the Palestine situation when compared to similar situations the World has seen in the past, Mr. Blair will do well to avoid getting confused while trying to bring peace to the region. There is only one way I can see for Blair to avoid wasting his time and it is this: He must adopt one of two frames of mind at the outset because anything else will send him on the wrong path. Either Mr. Blair begins with the notion that the trouble rests with the Palestinians who do not behave like a normal people under occupation or the notion that the trouble rests with the Israelis who do not behave like a normal people occupying someone else’s territory. And then deal with the guilty party.

If we listen to the noises coming from Israel and the Jewish Lobby, we would believe that the trouble rests with the Palestinians, and that the solution is to social engineer the Palestinian society, political engineer the Palestinian state and institutional engineer the Palestinian civil society, all according to blueprints drafted by Israel and the Jewish Lobby.

On the other hand, if we listen to the Palestinians talk about themselves, we would believe they are a normal people under an occupation that is so primitive and savage, only their civilised roots and their culture have prevented the situation from sliding into the bloodbath that similar situations experienced in other places.

Despite the fact that the Palestinians have been under occupation for three generations, equipped only with their bare hands and their bodies to defend against the brutal daily assaults delivered by the lethal weapons of a merciless occupier, they still manage to maintain a sense of normalcy never seen before from someone under similar circumstances. Therefore, not Israel, not Britain and not the United States have a fraction of the moral authority or a fraction of the credibility that would entitle them to tell the Palestinians, or any Arab for that matter, how to organise their society, their state or their institutions.

So, where do we go from here? Well, it is not the first time that the Jewish Establishment has attempted to engineer the lives of others. History is littered with pogroms and holocausts that resulted from such attempts. Anyone with half a brain will reject off hand the advice given by perennial losers on matters relating to human interaction, and Mr. Blair would do himself and humanity a favour by not according a hint of respect to what Israel or the Jewish Lobby have to say on this subject.

This leaves Tony Blair with the obligation to recognise that the trouble in the Middle East rests with the fact that Israel is being supplied with money, weapons and political support from the United States and Great Britain whose record on matters dealing with human interaction is not a shiny one either. Take away the support for Israel and you take away most of the troubles in the Middle East if not World.

After coming to term with these notions, Mr. Blair should recommend a package deal because the Israeli negotiators will want to have it both ways. They will pretend to negotiate only to see what the other side is prepared to offer in return for what, then ask for what was offered in return for promises they know Israel will never keep. This has been the pattern of their negotiations for ever. They pulled it off when dealing with the naive who trusted them, and they blamed the breakdown in the negotiations on the other side when confronted with a side that will not be conned.

For Mr. Blair to deal effectively with the trouble and bring peace to Palestine and the World, he should recommend the following: 1) Institute an immediate worldwide ban on military co-operation with Israel until a deal has been reached and implemented by both sides. 2) Declare an immediate no-fly zone and no-sail zone to protect the airspace and territorial waters of Palestine, and enforce the ban with the forces of the Quartet. 3) Supply Palestine with defensive weapons capable of countering every land based offensive weapon in Israel’s arsenal. 4) Make political support and financial aid to Israel contingent on the withdrawal from the occupied territories whether this comes before a final deal is reached or after it. 5) Make it a crime against humanity equal to genocide and equally punishable to advocate or to accept the notion that anyone but the entire population of Palestine has the authority to give up on the Palestinian Right of Return. 6) Begin the negotiations between the parties on all other matters.

If the Quartet is serious about bringing peace to Palestine and if Tony Blair is keen about redeeming himself following the damage he heaped on Iraq and Britain, this is what he will do. Anything less is bloody rubbish, mate!

Evil Defeating Evil

Nothing defeats evil as decisively as evil itself. This lesson comes out clearly when we look at the decades of games that the Jewish Lobby has played with regards to the Arabs and the petroleum issue.

The Arabs have most of the petroleum that the World needs and as long as this remains the case, the Jewish Lobby will be limited in its effort to incite the likes of America to sabotage Arab economic development and prosperity. This is why the need to carry on with the fancy footwork that the Jewish Lobby has been doing inside the politico-journalistic house of smoke and mirrors in Washington and elsewhere. And it has been quite a performance.

All the while, the Arabs worked to establish price stability for their oil, maintain a predictable market for the world and forge a good relationship with their clients as would do any successful business person. The Arabs went about their business knowing that the markets are driven not only by the buyers and the sellers but also the middlemen and the speculators, all of whom are out to make a buck, which is their right, but whose agenda is different from theirs and whose capacity to complicate things can be considerable.

However, being the consummate merchants whose trade routes helped to shape the march of Civilization, the Arabs knew how to deal with complicated situations and they navigated through the intrigues of the various marketplaces with agility. But what they did not count on were the games that the Jewish Lobby was adding to the mix. These were restless games that looked meaningless at first, which they were, but then proved to be self-defeating as well.

The Jewish Lobby went from calling the Arabs price gougers and blackmailers, to calling on the American military to go in and take the oil, to calling on the American public to change their lifestyle so as to use less oil, to calling on the American President to force a change in the lifestyle of Americans through taxation and so on. Like an evil spirit, the Jewish Lobby hovered all over the American map on this issue, and when it failed to make enough of a dent in favor of its cause, it tried to link the issues of pollution and Global warming to the business of Arab oil.

But in so doing, the Lobby has inadvertently given the Arabs what had eluded them for decades, the absence of demagoguery as they went about building a good relation with their clients and ascertained continued development for their economies. This is how the episode worked itself out:

Petroleum being a non-renewable resource that is hidden underground it is hard to discover and harder to get at. If you have it, you want to see it last as long as possible which means you try to get your hand on every drop of it that your instruments manage to locate.

And when you know you have it, you want to extract as little of it as possible and you negotiate to receive the highest price for what you sell. This allows you to implement your economic plan and have enough money to explore for new reserves. For all this to work smoothly, you need the goodwill of the oil companies which are your partners, and you need the understanding of the public which is your ultimate client.

The way to earn the goodwill and the understanding is to educate the consumers on all the issues involved so as to get them used to the idea of practicing conservation while paying a relatively high price for the oil. However, educating the consumer was impossible to do because the Jewish Lobby was doing it already but doing it the only way it knows how which is to use every imaginable pretext to create fear of the Arabs, jealousy for what they have and hate for the good things they do for themselves and their families with the revenue they earn selling the oil.

But then, as someone aptly put it, you get tired of hearing the same jackass bray the same song of hate for decades and you demand that there be a change. When you hear someone put things this way, you realise that the Jewish Lobby has defeated itself and you expect to see a change. And the change came when members of the Lobby began to sing a different song. They did the right thing, to be sure, but they did it for the wrong reason.

Instead of calling the Arabs price gougers and blackmailers, the Lobby is now trying to scare the public about global warming which it claims is caused by carbon dioxide produced when oil is used. Thus the need to conserve energy and to pay a higher price for oil which is what the Arabs wanted all along.

This, of course, is not an ideal situation because the pretext used by the Jewish Lobby to pull it off is a phony one but, in the eyes of the Arabs, it must be a step up from the regime of demagoguery that the Lobby has practiced for too long in the past.

Like they say in that mythical place which is yet to be identified: it is better to do the right thing for the wrong reason than do the wrong thing for the wrong reason.

Global Warming In Perspective

This article was first published on June 1st., 2007 in Al Ahdath, a bilingual newspaper published in Toronto, Canada.
__________________________

There is the probability that planet Earth is entering a warming phase, something that would require our attention. And there is no doubt that polluting the environment is a problem that needs to be addressed on many fronts. But the two notions are not connected and we need to understand a few things before we map out a way forward and let a potential irritant get out of hand.

Defining the greenhouse effect

The first thing we must do is understand what the greenhouse effect is. The greenhouse is a human invention that nature has not duplicated. Because vegetation needs a warm climate in order to grow, people in the cold places of Europe invented the greenhouse to capture and maintain the warmth provided by the sun especially during the winter months. To this end, they built houses made of transparent materials such as glass and plastics inside of which they grew vegetables, flowers and other plants. This is where the name greenhouse comes from.
The scientific principle exploited here is that the sun rays which are as hot in winter as they are in summer, penetrate the transparent walls of the house and deliver energy not only to the plants inside but to everything else including the stands, the pots, the soil, the benches, the tools and more importantly for the purpose of this discussion, to the gases and particles that make up the atmosphere inside the house. The question now is this: what is the difference between the conditions under which the plants grow inside the greenhouse and the conditions under which they grow outside of it?

The answer is that the plants outside the house are at the mercy of the weather. No matter how hot the sun rays may be, the heat they deliver to the plants is offset by the ambient air which is part of a system that extends to the polar regions of the planet. When it is winter and the ambient air is cold, the plants transfer to it the heat they receive from the sun as fast as they receive it by contact and by convection.

By contrast, most of the heat that is captured inside the greenhouse stays inside because the transparent walls that let in the sunshine act as a barrier that shields the inside from the outside. Some warmth does escape by infrared radiation but what remains inside is enough to let the plants grow as they would in summer.

We see here that a greenhouse is defined by the transparent wall which acts as a one directional barrier to solar energy. We now ask: is there a gas that plays the role of the greenhouse wall? And the answer is no there is not, there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas. What there is, however, which may confuse some people, are layers of gas and particles around the planet but these layers play a different role. Ironically, what they do is the opposite of what the non-existent gases are reputed to do, they help to cool the planet. A few examples are discussed below.

The ozone layer, clouds and dust

A layer of gas called ozone envelops the Earth and serves to absorb and to reflect back into space high energy radiation that can harm living things. Since radiation is a form of energy that would eventually turn into heat, reflecting it back contributes to the cooling of the planet however small the effect may be compared to the amount of heat that is brought to Earth by the visible light.

Also, when volcanoes erupt, they send dust particles high into the atmosphere which reflect radiation back into space and help to cool the planet. It is thought that a nuclear war on Earth would have a similar result, and the possibility was given the name nuclear winter.
Ordinary clouds also reflect the sunshine back out but clouds are made of water vapour which is a substance that merits a separate and more comprehensive discussion as it is done in the paragraphs that follow.

Gases, fluids and those in-between

Whether matter comes in the form of a gas or a fluid, it is made of particles called atoms and molecules. When these particles are exposed to the energy of the sun, they reflect some of it as visible light and convert the rest into vibration they transfer to another body by contact. Failing this, they convert the energy into heat they gradually lose as infrared radiation.

Because fluids are more dense than gases, they contain more molecules thus they store more energy. Also, because the particles in fluids are packed closer together, they transfer heat in and out of their molecules faster than they do in a gas. The consequence is that water molecules absorb and deliver more heat than air, and they do it at a faster rate. This is true even when water comes in the form of vapour floating in the air. And it is something we experience and feel in two ways.

When the weather is damp and cool, we feel it as nippy because the water molecules of the moisture absorb more heat from the skin than would air alone, and they do it at a faster rate. And when the weather is damp and warm, we feel it as warmer than the thermometer would indicate because the water molecules deliver more heat to the skin, and they do it at a faster rate than air. This is why the weather people invented the humidex system by which they communicate the degree of discomfort we feel on a hot and humid day.

The atmosphere of planet Earth

In its most pristine state, the atmosphere of the Earth is made of nitrogen at about 78%, oxygen at 21% and argon at nearly 1%. Because plants exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide back and forth with the atmosphere and because the oceans have the ability to absorb and to release gases including carbon dioxide, we find traces of the latter in the atmosphere at 0.033% or thereabout depending on where and when the reading is taken. Thus, the atmosphere is made of nitrogen, oxygen and argon at about 99.967% and a whiff of carbon dioxide. This is a ratio of 1 in 3,000.

All of the gases are held near the surface of the Earth by the force of gravity and there are no transparent walls to separate them from the void of outer space. As the sun shines on the half of planet Earth that faces it, light delivers a fraction of its energy to the gases and water vapour in the atmosphere. Light then goes on to deliver the rest of the energy to everything below the atmosphere like the oceans, the polar ice caps, the deserts, the plants and so on. Given that everyone of these has an index of reflectivity, each absorbs some energy and reflects the rest back out in the form of visible light.

The question is this: what happens to the energy that is absorbed by the oceans, the plants, the soil and so on? Well, photosynthesis and the chemical processes that use light make life possible. Also, the physical processes that use other forms of energy make the weather such as rain, lightening, wind, waves and other phenomena possible.

There is also this: the second law of thermodynamics is called Entropy, and it says that all those processes will eventually turn into heat which is infrared radiation. Some of this radiation is reflected back into space and the rest is absorbed by the gases and the water vapour that linger within a kilometre or two above the ground. And it is this energy that determines the average temperature of the planet.

This energy represents a small fraction of what is delivered to Earth in the first place. And given that water vapour absorbs and delivers more energy than gases, the latter do little to warm the planet. And since carbon dioxide is only 1 part in 3,000 of the atmospheric gases, carbon dioxide does not contribute to the warming of the planet one appreciable iota. The real culprit could be the water vapour but how so and why now?

Energy from below

If it turns out that planet Earth is indeed warming up, we should look at all possible sources for the phenomenon and get serious about it. To this end let us look at the core of the planet. We know that the decay of radioactive material heats up the interior of the Earth. Another source of heat can be a gravitational tide that would act in a periodical manner. In fact, there is evidence that other celestial bodies such as Venus and some moons circling Jupiter add to their warmth by the friction taking place at their core due to the uneven distribution of matter in their interior. And there is evidence that matter inside the Earth is beginning to rotate and reverse the polarity of the magnetic field, something that Earth has done periodically throughout its history.

An indication that our planet is adding to its heat in the interior is the phenomenon we call El Nino. This is when a sizeable portion of the Pacific Ocean warms up and causes the change in weather patterns all around the globe. When robotic cameras are sent to the bottom of the ocean, they send back pictures of boiling water coming out of the Earth’s belly. The hot water rises to the surface in accordance with the laws of physics and warms the rest of the ocean. This reality stands in contrast with the notion that the oceans warm up at the surface then transfer the warmth to the lower levels by a mechanism that so contradicts the laws of physics, it was never explained. An example that belies this latter notion can be seen in Toronto, Canada where water is pumped out of lake Ontario and sent to cool the buildings of the city because the water stays cool only a few meters below the surface no matter how hot the weather gets in summer.
And there are two other questions to be answered here: given that the sun shines evenly on all the oceans at the same latitude, why does El Nino happen to the Pacific Ocean with such force and not the other oceans or seas? And why does it happen randomly, not every year?
Also, a warmth that is coming from below would explain why glaciers crack and sheer close to the base before they crumble rather than melt at the top which would be the case if they were warmed by the heat in the atmosphere. In fact, the evidence suggests that this method of destroying glaciers has happened periodically in the past, and what remains to be shown is that such events have coincided with the reversal of the Earth’s magnetic polarity.

In conclusion, we must not relent in our effort to keep cleaning the planet of the harmful chemicals such as methane, nitrous oxide and the other substances we dump in the environment but we must also devote more attention and resources to finding ways to cope with a planet that will warm up despite our efforts to alleviate the problem. And if this is going to be a periodic occurrence, we need to find out how long the cycle will last.

Testing the theory

A laboratory costing a few thousands of dollars, one physics professor, a lab technician and a handful of college students should be able to conduct the required experiments to answer definitively how much the so called greenhouse gases trap heat from the sun and contribute to the warming of the planet. These people will need a room with a retractable roof or a window that opens to the sun. They will need inside the room a chamber made of glass or plastics, a few measuring instruments and a supply of the gases to be tested. Within a few days they will come up with answers that will be as accurate and definitive as science can ever get.

But why have such experiments not taken place by now? The chances are they have and the answers are hidden in a thousand nondescript laboratories. The trouble is that these are not "sexy" experiments and they do not come close to the glamour of receiving millions of dollars to conduct spectacular experiments at the poles and other exotic places in full view of the television cameras. And so, the latter goes on and is reported to the public which wholeheartedly approves of grants to be given out of the public purse. Not surprisingly therefore, the conclusion is always that the answer is inconclusive and that more experiments need to be conducted for which more grants are allocated because life on Earth is at stake and no one would skimp on that.

But surely the energy companies that are demonised day in and day out for contributing to the death of the planet would be interested in the result of such experiments. Of course they would be and they have the answer to every question that may be asked in this regard. But the companies will do little to explain the science involved in terms that lay people can understand because they prefer to keep the controversy going and cash in on subsidies that warm up their hearts more than the products they sell warm up the planet.

It must be understood that the companies and their shareholders can stand the heat and will not get out of the kitchen because what is cooked on their behalf is a delicious plate full of greens. In fact, loads of green dollars in the form of subsidies are handed to them on a silver platter in order to develop alternative sources of energy, and the companies will not cut off their noses to slap their faces. To be sure, they earnestly work to develop alternative sources but they do so as they continue to develop the traditional sources because there is no escaping our dependence on these.

The Y2K scare and the carbon scare

With some exception, this situation resembles that of the Y2K scare which took place near the end of the Twentieth Century. This is when it was claimed that planes will fall from the sky, hospitals will see the power cut off in the middle of critical operations and so on. This was to happen at midnight December 31, 1999 because computers were not programmed to handle the year 2000. The scare that raged for a couple of years resulted in billions of dollars being made by those who traded in the shares of software and other "high tech" companies as they rose to dizzying heights on the stock markets then crashed when the scare proved to be a quackery.

The difference between that scare and what I call the carbon scare of the present is that the first was dreamed up and promoted by those who benefited from it whereas the second came as a windfall to the oil companies. Windfall is not new to the oil companies whose success has always been determined by opportunities instigated not by themselves but by the political wind of those who caused the profits to materialise and to come down in their lap like manna from the sky.

Here is how that mechanism works. To go with the flow in this era of Jaws and Towering Inferno, the media have developed a form of jolly demagoguery where they scare people as they entertain them. First, the media are mobilised by a scare, be it a real one or something concocted by someone hungry to make easy money. In turn, the media mobilise the politicians who earmark billions of dollars to line the pockets of those who look like they may have the wherewithal to make the scare go away. In this case, they would be the oil companies and everyone who can spell the word energy. Those who imagined the scare in the first place get into the act and develop a myriad of ways to ride on the coattails of the oil companies and everyone who can spell energy. One way to make easy money is to trade in the stock of such companies, and this is where many go to participate in the feeding frenzy that ensues.

If lucky, the scare gets a boost from a character of the glamorous kind who would jump on the bandwagon and acts like a concerned citizen. The boost is amplified when the character is misinformed because he or she will then rely on entertainment to hold the attention of the audience and thus compensate for the lack of substance and the abundance of misinformation.
And when the scare is exposed as quackery, everything comes crashing down only to make way for someone else who would come up with a new scheme to attract the attention of the media. And the circus goes on as life struggles to stay focused while trying to avoid the antics of the glamourous, the quacks and the scare mongers.

A way forward

Suggestions are advanced all the time showing the way to reduce pollution, to be frugal in the use of resources and to address the warming of the planet. These are commendable efforts but what is regrettable is that the three issues were tied together because the quackery with regards to one diminishes the validity of all and paves the way for the quacks to move in and take advantage of the situation.

We must therefore reduce the influence of the quacks as we debate the warming of the planet by recognising that even though the energy we receive from the sun exceeds what is generated at the core of the Earth, our immediate problem may well be caused by the little that comes from below.

One way to alleviate this problem is to offset the energy we receive from below by reflecting into space some of what comes from the sun. Ideas like the placing of mirrors into orbit and the halting of forestation in the polar regions where trees reflect less light than do the ice sheets are good ideas. We must explore them and encourage people to come forward with more ideas.

Here is one idea. Using solar energy instead of the other resources may be a good thing if we do not lose sight of the fact that in so doing, we run headlong against Entropy. So, if the problem we want to solve is the scarcity of energy, then using solar energy rather than reflecting it makes sense. But if the other forms of energy are plentiful and the problem is only the warming of the planet, then using solar energy to cool the planet makes no sense because the best way to trap solar energy and turn it into heat is through a technology that is specifically designed to do that. And the solar panel is a most efficient way to doing that.

The alternatives

Instead of converting the sun’s light and heat into electricity, we should convert the naturally occurring kinetic energies such as the wind, the waves and the tides that are the byproducts of the sun’s energy. If it is determined that the twin problem of scarcity of energy and a warming planet have reached a serious level, we may have no alternative but to undertake engineering projects on a planetary scale that are both audacious and colossal. Here are two ideas:
In the same way that we exploit the geothermal sources of energy by tapping into the heat reservoirs which are close to the surface of the Earth, we should tap into the heat reservoirs which are deeper under the surface. We find these reservoirs under the volcanoes and near the continental fault lines at the bottom of the oceans.

With regard to the heat reservoirs under the volcanoes, we have the machinery and the know how to dig a tunnel at the appropriate distance around them. Water fed into the tunnel will turn into steam and run the turbines that produce electricity. As for the hot water that rises from of the seabed, it is packed with thermal and kinetic energies that can be harnessed to spin giant turbines.

Finally, if it turns out that the Earth is entering a warming phase that will last hundreds or thousands of years, there will be nothing better for all of humanity to do as a family than to work on projects of this scale.

An Open Letter to Dr. Norman Finklestein

This letter was first posted on The Palestine Chronicle before Dr. Finklestein had settled with DePaul University.
________________________

I read on your website that you may go on a hunger strike to fight for the principle of academic freedom. This is a worthy cause, Sir, but I implore you don’t do it. Academic freedom may be your immediate goal but the freedom you are fighting for is no longer academic, it is a universal freedom that is much larger than one post or one university.

Like it or not, Dr. Finklestein, you are no longer the sole owner of your person. You have embodied the fight of millions of people who hunger for the truth and for freedom, and you belong to all these people. You cannot go on a hunger strike and risk damaging your health without thinking of those who depend on you to nourish the dream that someday, they too will taste from the fruit you found so tasty you would sacrifice your health to have it again.

Before the internet, people used the method of the hunger strike to attract attention to their cause but you need not do that now because there is the internet, you have access to it and you make brilliant use of it.

In fact, your website is full of letters that have come from every corner of the Planet. The people who wrote these letters say how much they appreciate the stand you are taking with regard to the issues that touch their lives on a daily basis. These people want you alive, they want you well and they want you at the peak of your intellectual prowess.

By contrast, those who make life difficult for you want you unwell and weakened intellectually if not dead by your own doing. For those reasons and for many others, you must take care of your health to keep empowering the weak and the voiceless. Like a modern day Robin Hood you must go on sapping the strength from the mighty and the loud, and give it to those who struggle to stand on their feet, those who need to tell the World: "I am too and I have a story to tell -- hear me out."

I promise you, Dr. Finklestein, things will work out just fine in the end. I am of Arab descent and we, Arabs, are known for our patience. Believe me, Sir, when I say that patience does pay off even when things look so bleak that they seem completely hopeless. But things are not hopeless in your case because yours is a worldwide cause that has attracted support from everywhere.
What looks big to you today will be the object of your small laughter tomorrow. You are still young and this is a big world. Move on with your life, Mr. Finklestein, because you have much to live for with regards to yourself and to those who need your articulation of their dreams and aspirations with vigor and a forceful intellect.

Your job is not done yet because too many people still live without a voice to speak for them. Abandon them now and they will feel helpless once more and hopeless again. You have no right to do that, Sir, because you belong to them as much as you belong to yourself.

By all means, do what you feel is necessary to regain your post but first and foremost look after your health because without you, the cause for which you would sacrifice so much will have a diminished force behind it and your sacrifice will have been in vain.

Good luck, Professor, and keep us posted. It is nice to see someone like you win a fight like this. And I know you are winning because they are fighting you so hard. May they fight you harder still and may you win greater victories against the forces of darkness.

In The Belly Of The Nazis

I never knew John J. Miller too well and I shall not be eager to know him better in the near future. This is because, writing about Professor Norman Finklestein, Miller associated himself with the following quotation:

"His anti-climactic press conference, which closed the book to his DePaul career, was pitifully comical. His remarks were frequently interrupted by loud construction noises on the near-by DePaul campus. After reading a prepared statement to approximately 70 or 80 people, most being non-DePaul students on a campus of almost 20,000, he wanted to thank "a few" of his supporters. He ended up thanking a good majority of the crowd listening to his farewell speech. Thanking supporters implied some reception of an honor or an award, when in reality Finkelstein had just received his pink slip."

An important skill a teacher must have is the ability to navigate inside the head of his or her students so that he or she may see things from the students’ point of view and thus be able to address their concerns in a manner that resonates with each individual. And once in a while you get a piece of writing from a student that is so revealing, it says everything a teacher needs to know about this one student. The quotation above is a good example of this kind of writing, and I shall come back to it in a moment.

I am not Jewish but I was often taken for one because I have a stereotypical Middle Eastern Semitic physique, and one of my closest friends during all the time that I lived in Montreal was a prominent lawyer called Ralph Cohen. Ralph introduced me to many of the people he knew without bothering to tell them I was a Christian Arab.

My other good friend - I shall call him Saul - had a number tattooed on his arm from his days in the concentration camps of World War Two. At the time of the events I am here describing, he owned and operated a one-man cafeteria in the building where I worked. Saul knew who I was and he liked me if only because I made him look younger than he really was. In reality he was fifteen years older than me but the resemblance between us was so striking that when we stood side by side, people thought we were brothers; some even mistook us for twins.

The stories I can tell from those days would fill volumes but there is one story that is so telling, I must recount it here. One day I was standing among Ralph’s rich friends in the corridor of the building when Saul was seen, tray in hand, as he delivered coffee and sandwiches to people in their offices. I waved my arm to greet him at a distance but he did not respond even though he was looking in our direction.

A few moments later, one of those with whom I was standing asked me jokingly if Saul had been telling me stories of survival. The other men laughed derisively and thus began a discussion about survivors of the Holocaust. The main points that came out of this discussion were that even though these people were born with a silver spoon in their mouths and they lived in luxury ever since, they considered themselves survivors of one sort or another. When I pressed them to say exactly what it was that they survived, they told stories about business deals that went bad and personal relationships that went sour. And these poor souls expected me to shed tears for them.

When I later met Saul in the cafeteria as he was preparing to close up, he said he did not respond to my greeting earlier because he did not like the company I was keeping. I asked why and he said the people I stood with were grave diggers and bloodsuckers who tried to coach him on how to invent and tell stories about the Holocaust so that they may get him some money. But he knew of other instances when money was collected in the name of survivors yet only a small portion of that money actually went to the survivors. The rest was kept by the people who did the coaching and the collecting.

A few months later rumors surfaced to the effect that the International Monetary Fund may sell some of its gold reserves to help the Third World cope with their mountain of debt. The World Jewish Congress quickly jumped into the act and unleashed a worldwide campaign on behalf of the Holocaust victims to try and force Germany, Switzerland and other European countries to sell their gold reserves and give them the money.

Using some of the information and the insights supplied to me by Saul and by Ralph, I jumped into the act and wrote an article for an Arabic newspaper in which I asked that the money be given to the Palestinians who were suffering under Israeli occupation. Apparently this plea was heard in Switzerland and there came a suggestion that the government will consider distributing the money among all the people who suffer one form of indignity or another, and this would include the Palestinians. I have no information as to whether or not the Swiss actually carried out this pledge.

The article I wrote was about money but Saul had supplied me with information and insights that went beyond that. He told me how confident the Nazi guards were at the concentration camp in the beginning. He said the guards were so sadistic that when a prisoner went berserk, got hurt by accident or died, some of the guards expressed pleasure by smiling quietly. Others laughed so loudly, it sounded like bombs of joy were going off in their bellies. Torturing the prisoners must have been something they always wanted to do but they were constrained from doing it, and so they rejoiced when extraneous circumstances did it for them.

But then one day, the guards and the prisoners heard planes from the allied air force fly overhead. A few days later, they began to hear bombs explode in the distance. The guards lost their confidence but they never ceased to smile and laugh at the sight of a prisoner who was suffering or dying. But there was a difference between the first time and now, the laughter was becoming nervous and more muted. Now the allied bombs were exploding closer to the camp, said Saul, but not in the belly of the Nazis anymore. Instead, the Nazis had firecrackers go off in their bellies. You could see fear in their eyes for the first time and you felt that their intestinal fortitude was downgraded to the force of a firecracker.

Let me now get back to the quotation cited by John J. Miller. The two words: "pitifully comical" at the beginning of the quotation set the tone as to what this exercise represents. It is the nervous laughter of a writer whose self confidence is so low, he latches on to every extraneous circumstance he sees to help him contrive a point that would not stand on its own. He mentions the construction noises, the small number of people who gathered on the campus and of course, the pink slip. None of this says much about the man whose day the writer took the trouble to observe and to describe. In tackling the subject in this manner, the writer has revealed a sadistic pleasure at the fantasy he created in his own mind to the effect that circumstances have conspired to make life difficult for the man he hates as much as the Nazis hated the people they wished to see dead.

And John J. Miller thought the piece had the sort of merit he wants to be associated with. Someone needs help here. From the boy on the campus to the journalist that picked up the message to the publication that used it, they all need to take a look at themselves and see what they can do to clean up their act and to raise the level of the discourse in which they participate.
Here ends my responsibility as a concerned citizen of the World, and the ball now rests in someone else’s court.

Deadly Oxymoron

The English word is settler, the French word is colon from which the word colony is derived, and the oxymoron to which the title refers is the expression modern settler. To explain why I regard modern settler to be an oxymoron, I must take a long digression, so bear with me dear reader.

I begin with the rhetorical question: What if fifty years from now a country, say China, developed a weapon that is capable of paralyzing any piece of military equipment you can think of? The country then puts on a show to demonstrate the effectiveness of the weapon and the world notices with trepidation. Then imagine the Chinese pretending to open up to the American public but doing so only to establish contact with the criminal elements in the American society such as organized crime, street gangs, petty criminals and so on.

And then one day, without giving any warning, the Chinese use the weapon to paralyze the American military for a period long enough to walk into the country and take it over without firing a shot. At first, as you can imagine, the Chinese are cheered by their criminal friends in America. But then surprise, surprise! The criminals realize that the Chinese only used them when they needed them but now plan to double-cross them.

Left with nothing to console them for their troubles, the criminals take advantage of the fact that the Chinese have created a chaotic situation by dismantling the institutions which included the security apparatus, and they move to fill the vacuum. They borrow a page from the book developed by the Mafia during the wars of the Twentieth Century and play on the patriotism of the American people who reintegrate them into the society. Together, they form a popular movement to fight against the Chinese but the former criminals also unleash a sustained and clandestine attack against rivals and enemies of the past to settle old scores.

In the meantime, drawing on the resources they acquired as criminals, they mount a ferocious insurgency and do a good job at hitting the Chinese invaders then "dissolving" throughout a society that does everything to protect them. The Chinese redouble their effort to find and punish the insurgents and thus escalate the conflict to the point where America begins to look like Iraq or Palestine today.

A propaganda war erupts between the two sides during which the Chinese justify to their people and to the World their invasion of America by pointing to the horrors committed by the criminals against them and against other Americans. They present this picture as being the true face of America while ignoring the hundreds of millions of Americans who struggle every day to stay alive and to provide for their families despite the atrocious conditions of the occupation.

Whether or not this can happen to America is not the point. The point is that a similar situation exists today in Iraq and in Palestine. The forces that commit the atrocities in these places represent neither the Arabs nor the Muslims. They are a collection of old and new criminals, of once solid citizens now double-crossed by the invaders, and of kids who joined the conflict for the adventure as did the American kids who lied about their age to join the First and Second World Wars.

Students of history will recognize the destruction of local authorities, institutions and social fabric by a foreign power as being a classic colonial scheme. Such schemes were put into effect in the Americas, Australia and parts of Africa between the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. And there is no doubt that when the settlers first moved in, they found the indigenous people so different from themselves, they described them in a manner that conveyed a sense of superiority. But what the settlers never did was to denigrate the locals.

The difference between then and now is that the modern description of the Iraqis, the Palestinians, the Arabs and the Muslims is a clear and deliberate attempt at denigrating these people. However, this manner of waging a propaganda war was not invented at the time of the Middle Eastern wars. It started long before that, during the European wars a century or so before. For example, during World War One, the Allies accused the Germans of cutting off the hands of children and crucifying the adults. In response, the Germans accused the Allies of infecting their water systems with the plague and of gouging the eyes of their people.

But why do people go to such extremes to denigrate the opponent? As I see it, the reason resides in one’s frustration at the inability to colonize a territory in the classic sense. Modern awareness of the alternatives and modern methods to resist an occupation make it impossible to subjugate a people anymore. This means that in modern times, you can no longer settle into a place where you are not invited. Therefore, in the context I just described, the two words modern and settle contradict each other. When used together as in modern settler, they form an oxymoron.

For forty years the Israelis tried to settle in Gaza and the West bank of the Jordan River by force with the aim to expropriate the land and annex it to Israel. And for a number of years the Americans tried to establish bases in Iraq to build and to protect an apparatus for the exploitation of the petroleum resources of that country and the other resources of the region.

But neither the Israeli operation nor the American succeeded in any of their objectives, and the propaganda wars that ensued tell of the frustration that the invaders felt at their inability to realize their old and cherished dreams.

The sad and troubling part in all of this is that after a few years of this sort of propaganda, people began to believe their own lies. The word turned into action and the fiction became reality. And the oxymoron turned deadly.

Young soldiers paid with their lives and families from all walks of life were wiped out.

Solomonic Wisdom Reconsidered

Sitting as judge and faced with a difficult choice, King Solomon of the Israelites once pushed the issue to the brink. He threatened to cut a baby in two parts and give one part to each of two women who claimed to be the mother of the child. At this point one woman became alarmed and cried out she would rather let the other woman have the baby than see it harmed. This reaction established the alarmed woman as the mother, and the gamble that provoked the reaction earned King Solomon the reputation of being a wise king.

Pushing the issue to the brink was a gamble that yielded the desired result thousands of years ago when the judge was the king himself and the protagonists were two simple women. But this brand of wisdom is of little use in the modern world especially when it is employed to settle international disputes. Yet this is what the rulers of Israel practice on a regular basis because they live in the past and think of themselves as being endowed with Solomonic wisdom.

After the success of their initial rampage in 1947 which happened when Palestine was a colony of Britain, the Israelis pushed the region to the brink several more times in their quest to snatch still more land from the Arabs. The result was countless wars, thousands of dead bodies on both sides and little to show for the effort. Can this be Solomonic wisdom?

The supporters of Israel say it was all worth it because the country lost only a few soldiers as it gambled for treasures that would have surpassed the treasures of Solomon had it succeeded in snatching from the Palestinians what the leaders were aiming for. They add that other countries stood by Israel and they encouraged her, thus they must share in the responsibility if there is a responsibility to be shared.

Brinkmanship is a poor substitute for merit. As in a poker game, it is the bluff on which you rely when you have no right to what you desire yet desire it intensely enough to take a gamble and go for it. And when you have little of your own to gamble with, you gamble with what belongs to someone else if you can find someone willing to take a chance on you however small the merit of your case.

Israel convinced a number of countries to stand by her at one time or another, the last one being America whose power and prestige Israel gambled away to excessive extremes. Her agents run the Zionist Lobby in America and together they made America nurture Israel beyond the limits of what is sane. Then they got America to try and sweet talk the Arabs into "forcing" the Palestinians to give up their Right of Return.

However twisted was the logic behind this request, the Arabs knew it was coming and they were prepared for it in their psyche as they were conscious of the evil that was planted in their neighborhood. They used to have the most pleasant neighborhood on the Planet before the creation of Israel. In fact, so pleasant was the Middle East that it inspired the European Romantic movement of the Nineteenth Century. This was the movement that humanized Europe and raised the Continent to the level of a true Civilization. Countless poems, letters, novels and stage plays were written during that period, inspired by the beauty, culture, humanity and hospitality of the Levant, most notably Palestine. Europe longed to be like the Middle East before the neighborhood was soiled and turned into "a tough neighborhood" by the presence of the military fortress that is Israel and by her actions.

As expected, the Right of Return was not relinquished and the Arabs prepared themselves for the worst. The worst came as the Arabs were repeatedly shocked and awed by the terror that was unleashed on them in their beloved homelands in the name of providing "security" for Israel when the word security was a euphemism to mean expansionist policies. Except for a handful of kids who stood up to the mighty intruders and fought fire with fire, the Arab masses responded to the savagery of the aggressors with the kind of civilized patience that has been the hallmark of their culture, the patience that is the authentic wisdom to match a thousand Solomons.

And the patience bore fruit when America finally realized that no Arab will ever give away what belongs to the Palestinian people. Not even Yasser Arafat, the founder of the movement to create a nation for the Palestinians could have done it without the consent of all Palestinians, something he never sought, never received and never promised to anyone.

We are now left with the question as to whether or not the rulers of Israel will take the region to the brink of war one more time so as to put America on the spot and "force" the Americans to "force" the Arabs to "force" the Palestinians to give up on their Right of Return.

Before this happens, the American administration will be well advised to consider that in terms of moral authority, prestige or a clout to pull a stunt of this magnitude, America has little left to gamble away and no trump card to play with. One false step anywhere in the World, especially in the Middle East and America will be exposed as the king that lost his shirt in Iraq and lost his pants in Palestine.

And a king with no clothes is laughed at, not respected, revered or listened to. This is hardly the sort of wisdom that King Solomon would approve of.

Bill Hijarah

No, Bill Hijarah is not someone’s name. In fact, it’s not a name at all. It’s a phrase in Arabic. To be phonetically more accurate, it should have been written: "be al hijarah," or "b’ll hijarah," which is how it sounds when you say it fast. The phrase means: with the stones.

"B’ll hijarah, b’ll hijarah" is a cry I once heard while watching the news on television some decade ago or maybe longer. The cry became so engraved in my soul, I can never watch a spin doctor from the Jewish Establishment labor to denigrate the Palestinian people without the scene which gave birth to that cry come to memory and scream at me: "Don’t believe a word of this."

The scene is that of a young Palestinian woman running out of her house, one toddler on her arm and another toddler following her. She was not running away from something, she was running ahead to confront something. That something was an Israeli tank that was bigger than the house. The monster tank had come to demolish the house, and upon hearing it approach, the woman came out of the house with her children. She put down the child on her arm, picked up a stone and cried out to the toddlers: "b’ll hijarah, b’ll hijarah," as she threw the first stone at the advancing tank hoping against hope to stop its advance on the house.

No word, no poetry, no art, nothing that can be expressed verbally or otherwise may convey the majesty and the glory of the human spirit as it was expressed by this Palestinian mother and her children. And no envoy from the Jewish Establishment is big enough, smart enough or powerful enough to change this reality. But when someone from that Establishment goes on television to try and denigrate the Palestinian people, they only prove that lowlife can sometimes exist alongside a glorious majesty.

The glorious majesty is that of the Semitic Palestinian woman, her two toddlers and all those who hunger for justice while standing up to injustice with no more than a stone small enough to fill the hand of a child, and a heart big enough to envelop a love of life that no lowlife can ever grasp.

The lowlife is that of the commanders who send their tanks to demolish the homes of those whose homeland they once plundered and whose children they now kill lest they multiply and gain the political clout by which to reclaim what was taken from them by force of arm.

The lowlife is that of the spin doctors from the Jewish Establishment who go on television and denigrate the Palestinian people so as to say that Palestinians do not belong in the land where they have lived continuously since the beginning of time.

The lowlife is that of characters who made a mess of their lives throughout history in every corner of the planet then committed the largest identity theft in history by claiming they are the Semites and by throwing the anti-Semitic accusation at anyone who refuses to applaud their genocidal slaughter of the Semitic Palestinians.

The lowlife are the spin doctors from the Jewish Establishment who create imaginary paradigms that are mirror images of reality by turning reality upside down and by enforcing the paradigms through schemes that closely define the meaning of lowlife.

Finally, the glorious majesty is that of all the people of goodwill who will chip away at the phony paradigms one single grain at a time until the monster that is producing them is exhausted and depleted by attrition.

If a young Palestinian woman and her toddlers can brave a monster Israeli tank, we can all brave the monstrosity of the Jewish Lobby which seeks to destroy the lives, the careers and the reputations of those who seek to neutralize its toxic activities. And we should all seek to neutralize the Jewish Lobby so that humanity may live as it was meant to live, free of a constant source of poisonous intrigues and venomous demagoguery.

There is no loftier goal for all of us to accomplish together as one human family than this lofty goal.