If Kenneth Pollack who is with the Brookings Institution,
and if Shmuel Rosner who is with the Jewish Policy Institute, are not the
moderates they appear to be, imagine what Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel would be
like. Pollack wrote: “The Right
Way to Press Iran ” and had the article published
in the New York Times on May 7, 2014. Three days later, Rosner wrote: “Kerry's
'Mideast ' Failure was a success” and had it
published, also in the New York Times.
You will find that despite the facade of moderation which
these two articles project, they carry ideas and deliver tricks with the
potential to alter the American culture. And the authors use them to reshape
the world in which America
lives and influences deliberately and inadvertently. Given that Iran – which is
Pollack's concern – and given that the Middle East peace process – which is
Rosner's concern – are also the preoccupations of Benjamin Netanyahu, a man
that does not even try to appear moderate, you can imagine what lurks in his
head and his heart. You will conclude that if Pollack and Rosner are poodles,
Netanyahu is by comparison a jackal.
Six months into the negotiations between Iran and the other powers, Pollack describes
what has been accomplished so far, and adds this: “Washington
seems focused on … But those issues are not the keys to getting the best deal
with Iran .”
This means scrap the whole thing and start from scratch. Well, the lesson to
draw from this is that the pattern of coming near the end of a negotiating
process, and torpedoing it from the inside to then insist that the negotiations
proceed along a different track, is not a Pollack thing but a Jewish thing.
This is what the Israelis have been doing for twenty years in their
negotiations with the Palestinians, and no one has played this trick more
frequently and more brazenly than Netanyahu.
So you ask the obvious question: How does Ken Pollack
believe the Iranians will react when told about that suggestion? In fact, he
does give an opinion, and this is how he begins to explain it: “Of course, the
Iranians will probably object to all of this.” Well, when you see “of course”
and “probably” in the same sentence, you know that the author is joking and
could not care less what develops after his torpedo. Sadly, however, this has
also been the Israeli attitude with the Palestinians all along, though it was
done in subtle ways before Netanyahu, and has become in-your-face since he came
along.
But unlike Netanyahu, Pollack is not dealing with a disarmed
Palestine that
is under occupation and that sits helpless. He is dealing with an America upon which Israel and the Jews the world over
depend to eat, feel safe and enjoy a normal life. So he knows he has to be a
little more subtle; and the way he does that is best described by the Italian
saying which goes this way: “Screw them but do not show them your dick.”
Pollack is doing exactly that to America by following a ritual that
is as Jewish as the Star of David.
Writing about the Iran negotiations, the first thing
Pollack says is that the law and the facts are on “our side.” He points to
language in the agreement he interpreted in such a way as to assert that Iran has
accepted something it did not. Here is this part: “Iran would be treated as a normal
nuclear power after the terms of the treaty had ended. That was an implicit
acceptance by Iran
it would not be treated as normal until then.” In reality this is self-delusion
because if he believes that Iran
had accepted a provision that can be so interpreted, he would not have started
this segment of the presentation with the warning that the Iranians will
object. Obviously he knew better but chose to play with the words – a typical
Jewish pastime.
Sensing that most readers will laugh at this idiocy, he
backtracks a little by signaling that his interpretation may be less important
than other things. Here is how he puts it: “More importantly, the Iranian
government desperately needs to rid the economy of the sanctions.” But here
too, he senses that most readers will think it is idiotic to state the obvious
which is that most of the sanctions are still in place, and the agreement
spells out a protocol for their removal.
What Pollack does next is inflate the ego of the readers by
denigrating the Iranians. He does it by saying basically that the readers
should not have a high regard for these unprincipled people. Here is his
version: “Iran 's
leaders have demonstrated they sacrifice principles for benefits. They can be
convinced to do the same in a comprehensive agreement [that] will grant them
the economic revival and prosperity they crave.”
As to the Rosner article, this author tells what happened to
the Palestine
negotiations, and then adds the following: “Many consider this a failure. But
it's actually, in a way, a success.” From this point on, you sense that you're
being fed a series of reversals. Recalling that in Israel , truism had always been:
Jews and Americans stand against Arabs and Palestinians ... you are surprised
to know that Rosner now says: “Israelis and Palestinians were wondering whether
they should admire Mr. Kerry or consider him a fool.” You think about it for a
moment and conclude that there has been a shift in the Israeli strategy, but
you ask: a shift to what?
It does not take you long to see the shape of the new
strategy. Speaking in the name of the Jewish hierarchy, Rosner basically states
the following to the Americans: Do not feel bad that you failed because the
Palestinians and the Israelis got what they wanted which is the status quo. In
fact, while he may be speaking for the Jews, he also pretends to speak for the
Palestinians who want to put an end to the status quo. If somebody is desperate
about something, it is not the Iranians as asserted by Pollack, but the
Palestinians who have lived under the yoke of Jewish occupation for several
generations already, and have suffered savage treatment.
To explain his view, Rosner performs an act of gesticulation
that can only be called intellectual self-massaging of the most Jewish kind.
Sensing that this will not persuade a regular audience, he sets out to destroy
the most important premise upon which Israel built the old arguments.
Look at the following and marvel at the tailored for the occasion hubris:
“There are two false perceptions that repeatedly distort discussions of the
Israeli-Palestinian peace process. First is the misguided idea that everybody
knows what a final deal will look like. And second is the unfounded belief that
Israelis and Palestinians want peace more than anything else.”
Well, the second point has already been discussed. As to the
first, it is necessary to recall that when the Jews repeatedly justified
building new settlements on Palestinian land, the excuse they gave was to the
effect that everybody knows what the final deal will look like. They went on to
say: It is that the settlements will go on land which is destined to remain in
Jewish hands so why wait for the final deal? Let us build now and negotiate
later. To this, the world replied that talking this language invites humanity
to seek implementing the Final Solution, so why wait? Let us finalize now and
mourn your passing or celebrate it later.
Rosner is not smart enough to realize what he just did. On
the contrary, believing that he is riding high, he now moves to make a major
point that will tackle John Kerry head on. But he wants to soften the blow a
little, so he backtracks somewhat from what he said earlier. To do so, he
throws a qualifier into the mix: “Mr. Kerry and numerous other observers,
including many Israelis and Palestinians, don't think that waiting is a good
strategy.” With this, he tells John Kerry he is not alone but that “numerous”
observers and “many” Israelis and Palestinians are with him. He now moves to
deliver the blow: “they keep warning of doomsday scenarios – the latest of
which was Mr. Kerry's comment about Israel becoming an apartheid state,
for which he had to apologize.”
No, Kerry did not apologize because there was nothing to
apologize for. But what you see here are two examples in one sentence harking
back to the days when the Jewish propaganda machine was driven by rabbis.
First, they used to hound people with their incessant barks: apologize because
you slandered me, apologize because you defamed me, apologize or I'll sue you.
Apologize, apologize, apologize. Second, they used to portray their enemies as
being capable of responding only to coercion – just like animals. The twist
this time is that the enemy is no longer the Palestinians or the Arabs but John
Kerry and the Americans. He “had” to apologize, says Rosner, which means Kerry
responded to coercion like an animal.
At the end of the article you see one more thing that is
Jewish through and through. It is that when they encounter something new, they
describe it as having been there since the beginning of time and that it will
remain there to the end of time. They do not believe that something can just
happen here and now, or that it might disappear sooner or later. Look how
Rosner expresses this belief: “the mediator's inability to imagine and respect
that other people might have other priorities – a shortcoming that is quite
typical of American administrations.”
In other words, he says that America 's shortcoming is so
entrenched, successive administrations have been and will remain hopeless. And
this is what the Jews have said about every country they went into with high
hopes, and got out of with a kick in their behind.