Racism and Trump

THE ABSURD TIMES

Our country and the Mideast

By

Ellia dea

Our noble leader at work.   Hungry for anything.  Seems the invasion is over, but the kids are still locked up, 14,000 of them.  Many have people here more than willing to take care of them, recommended by their parents, but they are undocumented.  If they call the person and find that out, the people are referred to ICE.  After all, they are Mexican.

What else is going on?  Trump doesn't want comedians at the white House correspondent's dinner, and they caved in.  Last time he was there, that I remember, Obama deconstructed him and he didn't find it amusing.  In fact, I don't think he finds anything amusing or funny.  Low IQ.

He attacked the 9^th Circuit as having "Obama" judges.  Chief Justice Roberts set him straight one that (and he is only intelligent, not politically liberal at all) and then Trump tried to stir up a Twitter war with him.  It ain't gonna happen. 

Gun control with Ollie North as its spokesman – a huge black Friday sort of shooting in Hoover Alabama.  The name itself should be a warning.  The cops shot the wrong guy who is still on the loose.  Then, anybody who voluntarily goes to a shopping mall in a place called Hoover, Alabama on Black Friday is obviously taking their own lives very lightly.

They also shot up a mall in Alaska.

Some woman in Mississippi, land of the inbred Scots (apologies to the people of Scotland, it's not your fault), who makes a 1960s Jerry Lee Lewis look like a puritan, cheered public hangings and voter suppression and had posed at a Confederate museum with a gun,  She will probably win, but Trump will go down there to lend his support.  Who needs Jeff Sessions?

In a land of mawkish, selfish, and racist panorama

We are attacked with vicious, ignorant, and un-mellow Drama

God took a dump

And expelled Donald Trump

And we all miss Barack Obama.

Some crackpot went to some island to tell the people about Jesus.  They didn't want to hear it.  First they shot his bible and he got away.  So the bugger goes back: "My name is Paul and I want to tell you about Jesus".  This time they shot the arrow into him.  Moral: Get you Jesus outta here.

This is crazy!  This Trump is weird.  It's like a bad acid trip.  Go away.  Bats and lizards!!!  I can't take it!!

Intervention

By

Czar Donic

It seemed to us at this point in time to terminate Ellis' contribution and bring us back to the topic at hand as the rest of his contribution is incomprehensible.  Contemporary events sometimes overwhelm Ellis, but the limerick is fun.

Looking back at it, however, helped me realize why I've never been able to finish writing a work of fiction. One of the purposes of fiction is to concoct a story so vivid that it penetrates the veil that separates us from reality.  Today, finally, it is clear that the only real fiction is in the so-called "reality shows", which Donald Trump once starred in.  He is still doing the same thing, but he has hired someone else to say "You're fired".  There are rumors that Kelley will be dismissed and he is the one whose job it was to do that for him, so I don't know who it is that will do that.  Betsy DeVoss?  

Anyway, France is in trouble.  Macron is trying to blame the riots on the right wing, but it is his economic policy that is crippling him.  He is practicing what eventually brings down every government – austerity.   Whether he dislikes Trump or not, it will bring him down. 

May gave her policy for the EU or Brexit to parliament, and the members laughed.  She continued, but they continued laughing.  Jeremy Corbyn, a sane leader in England, gave a rebuttal, but the BBC cut away after about 15 brilliant minutes of his analysis, giving credence to the contention that the BBC had become the Fox news of Britain.

Anyway, the racism here is getting very stark these days.  Trump has lifted the taboo on the subject and the mental white wing is getting uglier by the day.  The attack in Pittsburgh was not against Zionism, but against Jews.   Same with the attacks on Muslims.  These people are too dumb to distinguish an Indian sect from Islam.  They just don't like what they perceive to be their race.  Of course, there are exceptions for Saudi Arabia and other places the racist in chief likes because they bribe him, but in general, it is a dislike of the "other".  They can't handle it.  Black people? Low IQ, of course.

Much of this is supported by Evangelicals and other Jesus freaks, so I'd like to say a bit about Jesus.  (As people see him.)  The freaks are everywhere.  Recently, I was driving through a busy intersection on a two lane.  I wound up behind a bus with a big sign saying HONK IF YOU LOVE JESUS!  Well, the driver missed one green light and was still not moving at the next one, so I beeped the horn to alert him.  The people in the bus went wild, waving, smiling, shouting – that was the last thing I wanted.  I tried to pass, but too crowded.  At the next red, I made an illegal u-turn and escaped. 

Now, this isn't the first time I ran into these freaks.  Once they knocked on my door and said "We have good news, you can be born again!" 

I yelled back, "and go through puberty once more?  NO THANKS!"

Well, I was telling my Dad about this once and he mentioned Mormons knocking on his door every Sunday morning.  He kept telling them, as well as he could with a splitting hangover, "Please don't come again."  Well, they showed up then next Sunday.  "Well, youse guys one one ting I like dat de odders don't dat I like/"

"Oh sir, that's that der Ploygany.  Now you bring some seven or eight girls here, let me pick out say four, and if dey put out real good, I might just sign up wid youse."

"Oh, no sir.  We don't allow that any more."

"Den wat da hell good are youse.  Get outta here!"

They never disturbed him again.

So now, a guy goes to an Island where they are not allowed.  They kill him with a bow and arrow right after he says "I came to tell you about Jesus."  This was his second attempt.  The first time he stopped the arrow with a waterproof Bible.  He is with Jesus now.

 Next election – I'd like to see Sherrod Brown as President and Kamila Harris as Vice President.  The only problem would be getting them elected. 

But we are far from the racism new.  Let's get back to it with out interview.

The following is Noam Chomsky on real anti-Semitism and the war on Gaza.   It may give some people a clue as to the difference between Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism. 

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. We continue our conversation with Noam Chomsky. Democracy Now!'s Nermeen Shaikh and I spoke to him on November 1st. It was just days after a gunman shot dead 11 Jewish worshipers, October 27th, at a synagogue in Pittsburgh. It was the deadliest anti-Semitic attack in U.S. history. I asked Noam to talk about anti-Semitism and his own Jewish upbringing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His father was a Hebrew linguist.

NOAM CHOMSKY: When I was a child, the threat that fascism might take over much of the world was not remote. That's much worse than what we're facing now. My own locality happened to be very anti-Semitic. We were the only Jewish family in a Irish—mostly Irish and German Catholic neighborhood, much of which was pro-Nazi, so I could see it better on the ground.

What we're now seeing is a revival of hate, anger, fear, much of it encouraged by the rhetorical excesses of the leadership, which are stirring up passions and terror, even the ludicrous claims about the Nicaraguan army ready to invade us—Ronald Reagan—the caravan of miserable people planning to kill us all. All of these things, plus, you know, praising somebody who body-slammed a reporter, one thing after another—all of this raises the level of anger and fear, which has roots.

The roots lie in what has happened to the general population over the past 40 years. People really have faced significant distress. An astonishing fact about the United States is that life expectancy is actually declining. That doesn't happen in developed societies, apart from, you know, major war or huge famine. But it's happening because of social distress, and not necessarily impoverishment. The people who are demonstrating this fear and resentment may be even moderately affluent, but what they see is they're stagnating. In the past, there was—you had this dream: You worked hard, you could get ahead, your children would be a little better. Now it stopped. It stopped for the last 40 years as a result of very specific socio and economic policies, which have been designed so that they sharply concentrate wealth, they enhance corporate power, that has immediate effects on the political system in perfectly obvious ways, even to the point where lobbyists literally write legislation. This onslaught has literally cast a bunch of the population aside. They're stagnating. They are not moving forward. They see no prospects. And they're bitter and angry about it.

AMY GOODMAN: And then, if you could talk about specifically the targeting of the Jewish worshipers, I mean, and the clear connection that the shooter made between this temple and HIAS, what's formerly known as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, the group that has helped to resettle refugees of any religion for well over a hundred years? And he repeated words that Trump has begun using more and more about, you know, they're helping the "invaders" come in. If you could respond specifically to that?

NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, I think it's pretty clear that he's whipping up terror about invasions, people pouring across the border to plan to kill us all, to destroy our civilization. You take people who are already somewhat disturbed and living under harsh conditions, this can incite them to acts of extreme violence against targets like the Jewish temple. All the anti-Semitic tropes are pointing in that direction, but most—also against Afro-Americans, immigrants, any vulnerable population or population that's easy to target for lots of cultural and historical reasons, all this amplified by the loud speaker up in the White House and his minions, who are doing what they can to terrorize the population, create the conditions under which you can get something like the attack on the synagogue.

AMY GOODMAN: So, I wanted to turn, then, to a clip of the Israeli ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, who was interviewed by Ayman Mohyeldin on MSNBC on Sunday, so it was soon after the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre.

RON DERMER: To simply say that this is because of one person or it only comes on one side is to not understand the history of anti-Semitism or the reality of anti-Semitism. One of the big forces in college campuses today is anti-Semitism. And those anti-Semites are usually not neo-Nazis on college campuses. They're coming from the radical left.

AMY GOODMAN: This is right after the white supremacist attack on the synagogue, and the Israeli ambassador to the U.S. is now injecting, saying this comes from both sides. If you could respond to this? Interestingly, two days later, when Trump and his family went to Pittsburgh, the only—and this is pointed out in The New York Times—the only public official standing there to greet him was Israel's ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer. People like the Pittsburgh mayor and the others said this was not the time to come.

NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, I think it's quite easy to understand. There is an alliance of reactionary repressive states developing under the U.S. aegis. Israel is a leading member of it. Saudi Arabia is another, one of the most brutal, regressive, harsh states in the world; United Arab Emirates; Egypt under the harsh, brutal dictatorship; the United States; Israel.

And the United States, of course, very—especially under this—the alignment goes way back, but the Trump administration has gone way out of its way to lend support to Israeli crimes, Israeli expansion. And the Israeli right wing, of course, which is increasingly dominant, is delighted. So, the fact that, say, the Israeli ambassador would come out and say that is really no more surprising than the fact that John Bolton would praise the election of a strong advocate of torture, murder and repression. It all fits the same pattern.

AMY GOODMAN: This issue of the number of people who died this weekend, the horrific massacre—11 Jews died. The model of the coverage, of knowing who each person was, hearing their names, their life stories, their ages, who their families were, knowing when the funerals are taking place through the week—what about this being a model for what's happening in Gaza? I mean, for example, on, I think it was, Friday, six Palestinians were killed, with those ongoing protests near the separation wall. Israeli military has gunned down more than 200 Palestinians. That was Friday. Six Palestinians died. And on Sunday, three Palestinian teenagers were killed in an Israeli airstrike on the Gaza Strip. Your thoughts on Dermer trying to make this connection to get away from the issue of white supremacy and, somehow, someway, blame the left?

NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, remember, all of this in Gaza is being done with overwhelming U.S. support, even U.S. weapons, literally.

Gaza is on the verge of becoming, literally, uninhabitable. The international monitors—U.N. and others—have warned that within just a few years, it may be literally unlivable. I mean, right now, there's virtually no potable water. The sewage pours into the sea, because Israel has bombed and destroyed the power plants and the sewage plant.

Back in 2005, when Israel withdrew its illegal settlers in Gaza and moved them to illegal settlements in the West Bank, it imposed a siege on Gaza. The official terms for that—official, not making this up—are "We have to impose a diet on Gaza, not harsh enough so they'll all die"—implication being that wouldn't look very good—"but harsh enough so that they can barely survive."

And there have been—quite apart from the brutal siege, there have been repeated attacks on Gaza by the Israeli army. Gaza is virtually defenseless. This is one of the strongest armies in the world, lashing out to devastate Gaza.

There's always pretexts. There are pretexts for everything. Hitler had a pretext for invading Poland: He was protecting Germany from the wild terror of the Poles. And the Israelis, with U.S. backing, have concocted pretexts—no time to go through it here, there's plenty in print about it. Every one of them collapses on inspection. It's just a punching bag.

And the effect on the people of Gaza is to create utter desperation. The current march is just an attempt to somehow break the siege, make life possible. The problem could be overcome easily, simply by providing them with the opportunities for survival. That's it. Not trying to block every attempt at political unification of the factions. It's often been a pretext for another attack.

Some of what's gone on—parts of it we've seen—are just grotesque, like when a highly trained Israeli sniper murders a young woman far from the border who's trying to help—a Palestinian volunteer medic, young woman, who's trying to help a wounded man, and a sniper murders her. Highly trained snipers. They know what they're doing. The international monitors who have gone through the hospitals are shocked by the kinds of wounds they're finding, purposely designed to maim people so they'll barely—not kill them, but maim them, so they won't be able to have a—even take part in the minimal life that exists there.

Actually, Trump had a solution to this, to the misery of Gaza and the prospect that 2 million people, half of them children, will soon be in a situation of, literally, beyond the possibility of survival. They had a lifeline, what's called the UNRWA support, international support, which was barely keeping them alive. So, Trump's reaction is to cut it, cut support for it. And he even had a reason. He said, "They're not being grateful enough to me for my efforts to give them the ultimate deal that I'm planning." Ultimate deal, which means give up all your rights and forget it.

I mean, the war in Yemen, which finally, at last, is getting a little bit of attention, has been a major horror story. The most careful estimates of the killing, that are now just coming out, show that there may be seven or eight times as high as what has been—the numbers that have been given. They're on the order of 70,000 or 80,000. The analysis of these Saudi-Emirate programs, a long study that came out of the Fletcher School of International Diplomacy at Tufts University recently, showed, quite persuasively, that the policies of the attackers are aimed at destroying the food supplies, making sure the population starves to death. They're also trying to close the port through which some supplies come.

All of this is fully backed by the United States. U.S., and Britain secondarily, supply the arms. The U.S. supplies the intelligence for the Saudi Air Force, which is carrying out massive atrocities. All of these things are happening. For years, they've barely been discussed. Now, finally, you're seeing pictures on the front page of starving Yemeni children, even a call for a ceasefire—much belated, little attention to our crucial responsibility for it.

Just like our responsibility, which is overwhelming, for the plight of the miserable people trying to escape from the troika—Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala—the three countries that have been completely under our thumb and are suffering bitterly for it, now trying to escape. So we turn them into an invasion mob planning to destroy us. All of this is surreal. It only is overshadowed by the failure to attend even minimally to the literal existential threats, that are not remote.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you consider this one of the gravest times, in your lifetime, in U.S. politics, Noam?

NOAM CHOMSKY: It's one of the gravest times in human history. Humans have been around for 200,000 years. For the first time in their history, they have to decide—and quickly—whether organized human society is going to survive for very long. So, is it the most gravest moment in my life? Yes. But also in all of human history.

AMY GOODMAN: The world-renowned professor, linguist and dissident Noam Chomsky. He was speaking to us from Tucson, Arizona, where he now teaches at the University of Arizona. He's also institute professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he has taught for more than 50 years.

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

`

Netenyahoo v. Judaism, Mossad, et al.

THE ABSURD TIMES

Netenyahoo v. Judaism, Mossad, et al.

by

Credence Sheik Fritz

Oh, forgot, you might want to see this absurdity again, so here he is addressing the United Nations General Assembly.  I wonder if he is stupid enough to bring it along to the joint session:

            I'm not sure who did the artwork, but Voltaire is quite right and that is an accurate translation. 

            The Speaker of the House, the Schweinplatz, invited Nitwityahoo to come and address the congress of the United States.  Obama will not meet with him, however, citing a long and accurate tradition of never meeting the head of a government who is up for re-election less than two weeks before that election.  His statement is very much like his veto of the pipeline because it has not been reviewed as of yet.  Actually, it has been reviewed, but not correctly and accurately so it has to be done over until they get it right.

            This is the guy who conducted the last Gaza war, or Blitzkrieg.  Just in case anyone is wondering, only 5% of what governments pledged to rebuilding Gaza has not been sent and millions due to the Gazans have been appropriated by Israel. 

            How do we work Brian Williams into this?  We don't.  He had a great sense of humor, but got caught up in wayward self-aggrandizement.  I am not a bit more bothered by his dismissal than the general garbage fed us daily as news on the networks.   Frankly, I see nothing of substance in the whole thing.

            However, back to the topic.  I understand that in Judaism, killing is forbidden (unless it's your son and God tells you to do it -- don't worry, He'll say "just kidding" at the last minute).  Well, there was a great deal of killing in Gaza and Israelis are killing Palestinians on the West Bank regularly.  Nitwityahoo is the Killer in Chief, so he is not Jewish, I take it.  In fact, one might say that anyone who calls Israel a "Jewish State" could be considered anti-Semitic.  I have had confirmation of this from several Jews who live in Israel, so I guess this is true.

            The only other stated concern is the FEAR that Iran is building an atomic bomb!  That would be a Shia Bomb!  However, Mossad, their super-spy agency says that it does not have the capacity to build one now nor does it seem to want to build one.  Certainly the last President repeatedly stated that they do not and considered it a "weapon of the past and useless today, also evil".  Forgetting the evil part of it, it does seem unlikely that a bomb will be built.  So says Mossad.  That's the outfit that hacked Iran's computers awhile ago and that is pretty well-respected as spy-agencies go.  Not very nice guys, but pretty accurate, so to speak.

            So now we have Nitwityahoo speaking to a joint session of the Schweinesbund.  A few sane members of either the Senate or House will boycott the session.  Even saner ones just will not show up.  Why bother?

            Anyway, here is a pretty good interview documenting the above (all except Amraham and Isaac):

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2015

As Netanyahu Tries to Stop U.S.-Iran Deal, Leaked Cables Show Israeli Spies Reject His Nuke Claims

In what has been described as the biggest intelligence leak since Edward Snowden, Al Jazeera has begun publishing a series of spy cables from the world’s top intelligence agencies. In one cable, the Israeli spy agency Mossad contradicts Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s own dire warnings about Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear bomb within one year. In a report to South African counterparts in October 2012, the Mossad concluded Iran was "not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons." The explosive disclosure comes just as the United States and Iran have reported progress toward reaching a nuclear deal, an outcome Netanyahu will try to undermine when he addresses the U.S. Congress next week. We go to Doha to speak with Clayton Swisher, the head of Al Jazeera’s investigative unit, which broke the Iran story and several others in a series of articles called, "The Spy Cables."

Image Credit: Reuters

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AARON MATÉ: Just days before his controversial speech to the U.S. Congress, an explosive report has raised new questions about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s effort to thwart a nuclear deal with Iran. According to Al Jazeera, Israel’s spy agency, the Mossad, contradicted Netanyahu’s own dire warnings about Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear bomb within one year. In a leaked cable to South African counterparts in October 2012, the Mossad concluded Iran was, quote, "not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons." The assessment was sent just weeks after Netanyahu went before the U.N. General Assembly with a far different message. Netanyahu held up a cartoonish diagram of a bomb with a fuse to illustrate what he called Iran’s alleged progress on a nuclear weapon.

PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: This is a bomb. This is a fuse. In the case of Iran’s nuclear plans to build a bomb, this bomb has to be filled with enough enriched uranium. And Iran has to go through three stages. By next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move on to the final stage. From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks, before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb. A red line should be drawn right here, before—before Iran completes the second stage of nuclear enrichment necessary to make a bomb.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in September of 2012. The Mossad assessment contradicting Netanyahu was sent just weeks after, but it was likely written earlier. It said Iran, quote, "does not appear to be ready" to enrich uranium to the higher levels needed for a nuclear weapon. A bomb would require 90 percent enrichment, but the Israeli spy agency, Mossad, found Iran had only enriched to 20 percent. That number was later reduced under an interim nuclear deal the following year.

That 2013 agreement laid the basis for the ongoing talks in Geneva this week between Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif. The U.S. and Iran are seeking a framework agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program and impose international monitoring in return for an easing of U.S.-led sanctions before a March 31st deadline. The talks appear to be gaining momentum, with the involvement of high-ranking officials from both sides and leaked details of a plan to limit Iranian nuclear production for at least 10 years. They are set to resume next week.

AARON MATÉ: The advancing talks and the leaked cable come just as Netanyahu prepares for a controversial U.S. visit, where he’ll try to undermine the nuclear deal. On March 3rd, Netanyahu will address a joint session of Congress on Iran at the invitation of Republican House Speaker John Boehner. The trip has caused a major rift with the White House, to the point where Obama has refused to host Netanyahu for a meeting. Administration officials are also reportedly withholding details of the talks from Israeli counterparts. Speaking last week, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Israel has spread false information about the proposed nuclear deal.

PRESS SECRETARY JOSH EARNEST: There’s no question that some of the things that the Israelis have said in characterizing our negotiating position have not been accurate. There’s no question about that.

AMY GOODMAN: With the White House accusing Israel of spreading falsehoods, the new revelations about Israel’s own intelligence assessments mark the second time in one week tying Prime Minister Netanyahu to dishonest claims about Iran.

The leaked cable appears to have come from inside South Africa’s intelligence service, revealing its exchanges with counterparts around the world, including the U.S., Israel, Russia, Britain, France and several Arab and African nations. Other revelations so far include CIA attempts to establish contact with Hamas despite a U.S. ban and a threat by President Obama to force the Palestinian Authority to abandon its bid for U.N. recognition. More disclosures are expected in the coming days.

For more, we go directly to Doha, Qatar, to be joined by Clayton Swisher, director of investigative journalism at Al Jazeera, which broke the Iran story and several others in a series of articles called "The Spy Cables." He co-wrote the piece, "Leaked Cables Show Netanyahu’s Iran Bomb Claim Contradicted by Mossad," that appears in The Guardian newspaper.

Welcome to Democracy Now! It’s good to have you with us, Clayton Swisher. Explain what has happened. What did South Africa get a hold of? Is there a South African Ed Snowden?

CLAYTON SWISHER: Well, I think, after the Edward Snowden experience, someone would have to have their head checked to publicly fess up to being the source of such a leak, given all the travails that followed Edward Snowden after he essentially outed himself. This was a digital leak made to Al Jazeera. And one of the reasons people bring information to Al Jazeera in the past, as they did with the Palestine Papers and other projects, is because that they know we’ll take every step we can to protect and shield their identity. So, the way that we got these files, this digital leak, is not up for discussion.

But it is, I will gladly describe for you, an unprecedented window into how espionage is conducted, not just in South Africa, but the broader continent. What we have obtained is perhaps best thought of as, you know, if you look at a discarded bag of rubbish, you won’t know what’s inside it until you open it up. Similarly, in this—it’s not rubbish, it’s actually very useful information, but it’s an absolute assortment of things that are seemingly unrelated but nonetheless highly newsworthy. There is a high concentration of humdrum, routine intelligence cables within the South African security services that we came into possession of, and, in addition to that, correspondences from a variety of Western and foreign intelligence services asking the South Africans to take certain actions or trying to influence the South African intelligence services on a certain course of action. So, they’re, you know, an absolute fascinating window into how things are done, but they’re a fragment in a mosaic, and we’re missing—very much so—the rest of the painting. But what we can do is reveal what—you know, what operational cables that we can put into context. And that’s why we said in our editors’ note we’re not publishing everything, purely because it either wouldn’t be in the public interest or it wouldn’t add up to a bigger story in and of itself.

AARON MATÉ: So talk about what has emerged here on the issue of Iran. Just as talks are picking up between the U.S. and Tehran, and just as Netanyahu is coming to the U.S. trying to undermine their deal, an internal cable reveals that the Mossad contradicts Netanyahu on his own claims about Iran’s capabilities.

CLAYTON SWISHER: Well, there was much discussion that came after Netanyahu’s 2012 U.N. speech that he was at loggerheads with his Mossad chief, Meir Dagan. That was discussed, and in fact Meir Dagan even publicly said that a war with Iran would be a bad idea. But what is just—I think what’s breathtaking for the journalists who work on this is to see Mossad’s classified documents—a top-secret assessment no less—that is now available for the entire world to peruse and read at its own leisure. I mean, clearly, Netanyahu came and spoke before the entire world, presenting information that was in direct contradiction to the country’s premier intelligence service. It begs a strong question: Where did he get his information from? Was he taking talking points from the Washington Institute and AEI, or was he listening to his own intelligence services, who the government of Israel pays to look after this sort of material? So, it makes it a question similar to what Americans experienced in the run-up to the Iraq War: Is this based on intelligence, or is this based on political fiction? And, you know, I’m a journalist, true. I’ve lived here in Qatar for going on eight years. I’m also a citizen of this planet, and I think everyone who’s a citizen of this planet who lived through the Iraq War and who think of an impending Iran war, we should do everything to scrutinize the politics behind people who wish to start a new war, particularly with Iran, which would not only be a disaster for the United States at home, but also for the region and the entire world. So, as Netanyahu is going to come to the United States, I think there’s every reason to have beyond a healthy skepticism of what he intends to say at his, you know, home audience, if you will, the U.S. Congress. In fact, I would say that, you know, knowing what we know now with this top-secret Mossad cable, we should demand strict evidence of anything that he says before the American public, because it may in fact inform our elected officials to make a decision on whether or not to use military action to defy President Obama’s diplomatic efforts, etc.

AMY GOODMAN: Clayton Swisher, in addition to the former Mossad chief, Meir Dagan, who left office in December 2010, disagreeing with Netanyahu wanting to prepare a military attack on Iran, there are other leaders in Israel’s security establishment who, you write, were riled by Netanyahu’s rhetoric on the Iranian nuclear threat, accusing him of "messianic" political leadership pushing for military action. Can you explain?

CLAYTON SWISHER: Sure. I mean, it’s long—it’s long been the Israeli security military tradition where there’s a class of people—they refer to them as "bit hunis [phon.]," which are people that are in the security sector but are also seen as having a rational worldview, if you will, that want to establish some form of peace with their neighbors. Oftentimes—there’s an excellent film called The Gatekeepers, which I would recommend anyone watch, that interviews the last several directors of Shin Bet, their domestic intelligence service. And you find—actually, when the documentary interviewer sits with these Shin Bet directors, you find a much more pragmatic outlook and a much more realistic assessment of—you know, for example, on the Palestinian issue, that the Israeli government can’t continue killing Palestinians if it wants to have a permanent place in the neighborhood.

Yet the security people are often trumped by the politicians, the loudmouths, who are perpetually campaigning. If you think it’s bad in the U.S., it’s a perpetual campaign in Israel. And as a result, you don’t really get mature discussions, mature conversations in the public from their leaders. And it’s a very—it’s a very real risk. And it’s, I would hazard to guess, why Israel has not been able to make peace, because time and again they have proven to not have leaders who have been thinking in the long term, but politicians who are seeing which way the winds are blowing and how they can get through the next election.

So, unfortunately, in some instances, the only ones that have the real assessment on Israel’s security happen to be people who live in classified worlds. And I think it’s extraordinary the amount of security officials that spoke out and sniped against Netanyahu, because they realize the stakes are very high. They’ve seen the Iraq War experience, where bad intelligence got mixed into politics, and people sat on it and didn’t speak up. And lo and behold, now Israel has ISIS on its borders, and they’re further than ever from ever being welcome in the neighborhood. And, you know, it’s—looking back at the two-state solution is pie in the sky. So, you know, I think, frankly, as a journalist, I’m skeptical of everyone. But in this case, it’s remarkable to see Mossad at such variance with the prime minister. If only the United States had had that kind of disclosure ahead of the Iraq War between what the CIA was saying and what the Bush administration was saying, a war may have been averted.

AARON MATÉ: Let’s hear from more of Benjamin Netanyahu speaking last month. This was International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and Netanyahu used the occasion to accuse Iran of planning another genocide against the Jewish people.

PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: The ayatollahs in Iran, they deny the Holocaust, while planning another genocide against our people. Let me be clear: The Jewish people will defend itself, by itself, against any threat. That’s what the Jewish state is all about.

AARON MATÉ: That’s Benjamin Netanyahu speaking last month. The irony, Clayton, of course, is that it’s Netanyahu who has threatened attack on Iran for many years over its alleged nuclear activities—a violation of the U.N. Charter, in which you can’t make threats to other nations. But let’s talk about some of the other revelations here. Talk about the claims that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas opposed the U.N.'s endorsement of a report that accused Israel of war crimes, and also President Obama's attempt to pressure Abbas on seeking statehood recognition at the U.N.

CLAYTON SWISHER: Well, I’ll take it in that order then. So, in the case of the—there is a leaked cable describing an effort by Meir Dagan, the leader of Mossad, calling the South African spy boss on the eve of the U.N. Human Rights Council vote on whether or not to recommend Israel face investigation for alleged war crimes in Gaza in 2009, asked the spy boss of South Africa: "South Africa should not vote, and you know why? Mahmoud Abbas does not want South Africa to vote, because it will harm his political party and bolster that of his opposition in Hamas. And, of course, Mahmoud Abbas cannot say this publicly, so the Mossad is asking you, South Africa, not to cast your vote." And I think that, if anything—and we’ve seen a lot of evidence over the years. I was involved in the Palestine Papers in 2011. We had a whole mountain of evidence showing that President Abbas had advance knowledge that there was going to be an Israeli attack on Gaza, that he opted not to warn his people, that he was under incredible American pressure not to advance any sort of war crimes investigation, that it would be seen as prejudicing negotiations—which were moribund anyway—and he went for it. And so, you know, people were saying he bungled it. I think the evidence now is far the opposite. He directly obstructed it, and it was an abject—I’m sorry, it was, you know, an abdication of his responsibilities as a leader and shielded the occupier, that he’s supposed to be liberating his people from, against any possible war crimes.

And so, you know, this—to me, there’s too many data points. There’s too much evidence that’s now out there showing that he shielded Israel. And some will say, "Well, he just recently joined the ICC." Well, you’ll note that after the recent 50-day conflict of last summer, he waited until well after the conflict ended before signing theICC. And what has Israel done in the meantime? They’ve gone in and launched their own investigations. And under the ICC rules, if one of the parties is seasoned in investigation, the ICC cannot do it. And the Israelis are going to say—mark my words—for many years, that they’re investigating, and it is credible, and we’ve got it all covered. And, you know, meanwhile, evidence is lost, memories fade, people die. You know, this was beyond bungling. You know, this was a craven abdication of his responsibilities. And I think that the cables make this clear now in a very oblique way, from South Africa of all places.

With respect to the cable that suggests there was a CIA operative in East Jerusalem who asked a South African operative to help with inroads with Hamas, the South Africans then write between themselves, Pretoria and East Jerusalem, "Well, how can we then run this CIA guy to see what kind of information they’re after?" It’s a very, again, oblique window into what the CIA’s interests are. You remember, in 2009, President Obama wanted to have a new relationship with the Muslim world. He spoke in Cairo. Autocrats were adopted by the Bush administration. Obama came in and thought, "Well, maybe there is room for political Islam." This was when they were still open to the idea, let’s say. So, it makes sense—it makes sense to me, at least. We’re reporting that this interest was expressed, but of course we don’t know whether theCIA took it forward. Hamas has said today on Al Jazeera they deny official contact, but they won’t say whether there was unofficial. And who knows how that’s defined? So, I think it’s intriguing.

AMY GOODMAN: You also note that a South African State Security Agency report from November 2012 records a Palestinian intelligence officer handing over a memo detailing a phone call made by President Obama to Mahmoud Abbas, where President Obama threatened Abbas if he goes ahead with the U.N. bid. Now, Abbas ultimately does. But explain the significance of this, and then also the cables revealing the same former Mossad chief, Meir Dagan, personally lobbying South African intelligence officials in 2009 against South Africa endorsing the findings of a U.N. inquiry led by the South African judge, Richard Goldstone, which alleged war crimes carried out by Israel’s three-week bombardment of Gaza in 2008 and 2009.

CLAYTON SWISHER: OK. Well, with respect to President Obama trying to, you know, convince Mahmoud Abbas not to go ahead with statehood, it’s important to note that the United States has always been hammering Palestinians to abandon armed resistance and embrace peaceful, nonviolent struggle. And you can understand the frustration of Arabs, Muslims and especially Palestinians, when they look at the American rhetoric, and they say, "OK, well, what’s wrong with, in embracing that nonviolent struggle, we take legal measures—pen to paper, we submit it before a court—or we petition a very legal body, like the United Nations, and we ask for things like diplomatic recognition?" It’s absolutely indefensible, and it’s just painfully hypocritical, when you see U.S. officials, like President Obama, as revealed in "The Spy Cables," or Samantha Power on the floor of the United Nations, obstructing these very blatant efforts by the Palestinians to exercise some kind of resistance through legal, peaceful means. You tell them violence is out. You tell them legal means is out. What do they have left? They have—I mean, it’s just—it’s absolutely absurd.

And we’ve seen, in recent events, they’ve gotten statehood. Did the sky fall? No. We see, in recent events, they joined the ICC. Did the sky fall? No. So, every time that they threaten all of—you know, that the end is nigh and this will—you know, this will damage things beyond recognition, the peace process is already damaged beyond recognition. And it’s only a handful of Western analysts and Pollyannaish journalists who continue to believe that there is a two-state solution and that this—you know, what’s been created on the ground can somehow be reversed. Rather than looking beyond, you know, President Obama and his administration has very much made this situation, in fact because they haven’t allowed Palestinians to express themselves, you know, through these various mechanisms.

AMY GOODMAN: Clayton Swisher, we want to thank you for being with us, director of investigative journalism at Al Jazeera. He’s overseeing the network’s coverage of "The Spy Cables." And we’ll continue to report on what’s revealed. He’s speaking to us from Doha, Qatar.

This is Democracy Now! 

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program ncorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

     

-->