WALKING ON EGGS
By Israel Shamir
The NY Times is a bountiful spring of instructions to perplexed mankind. Its
editors appointed by Mr Sulzberger (apparently, God's representative on
earth) have an advice for everybody: what should the French do with their
cheese (pasteurise and shove it you-know-where), Russians with their media
(give it to Mr Gusinsky, a coreligionist of Mr Sulzberger), Chinese with
their country (open it to Enron) and Palestinians with themselves (die,
soonest). Now from their Mt Sinai on the 5th Avenue they conferred on
grateful humanity a new commandment penned by Ian Buruma, directing us How
to Talk about Israel.[1] Yes, it is delicate task. You may speak freely
about Saudis and describe them as a medieval Kingdom of Evil, famous for
their cruelty and barbarism (Norman Liebman) or their monstrous regime
(Lenni Brenner), you may say that Swiss are mean and ugly, you may call
French 'froggies'; moreover, you may pour scorn and hate on the United
States of America, as (justifiably) did Ms Roy in her recent epistle. But
you have to be guided by Mr Sulzberger and his hacks if you dare to Talk
about Israel.
What is so special about Israel? Our sweet Jaffa oranges? Our modest nuclear
armed forces able to destroy every European capital? Our superb snipers who
can kill a child at half a mile? Our wonderful torture equipment eagerly
purchased by every Enemy of Terrorism? No, when Buruma writes 'Israel', he
does not mean the State of Israel, a small but nasty piece of goods located
somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean. He means a much stronger entity.
Our friend, a gifted American writer Ghassan Ghraizi, whose novel, "Israel,
by Any Other Name" I warmly recommend, was tricked by wily Buruma:
"I started reading Buruma, expecting an answer to how I can discuss Israel
with some of my Jewish friends; but all I got was obfuscation and
misdirection. Starting with the first three words, 'the Jewish Problem',
Buruma exploits the symbols of historically European Jewish persecution to
confuse the Palestinian grievances. Like a magician's, Buruma's misdirection
of focus on 'anti-Semitism' blurs a reader's understanding. The remaining
text suffers from contradictions, omissions, and false comparisons." (read
full text of Ghraizi's review below).
Innocent man, Ghraizi, did not understand that Buruma (and many other
people) used 'Israel' as a euphemism for the ineffable J-word. There is
nothing special about Israel but we are full of Mr Sulzberger's nephews and
Mr Wolfowitz' cousins. Nothing special, but whatever passes for the American
Mind is manufactured by the JINSA. Nothing special, but we get more American
money than any part of the USA. Nothing special, but every American
politician from the President down to last State Governor will say 'uncle'
if asked by our Prime Minister. In plain words, our special position is
nothing but an indicator of exalted, nay, unique position of the American
Jews.
Witty Miriam Reik from New York City noted: "The fact that Ian Buruma wrote
it as if walking on eggs, shows the depth of the problem." (read her
response below). Still, publication of Buruma's essay (at the bottom of the
email) is an important and encouraging event. Not because he says something
new - he does not. Not because he is honest or sincere - he is not. But it
is a sign that the elusive Enemy reels under the brunt of attack. It is a
hurt cry, the first cry of Goliath hurt.
Two years ago, when this list departed into uncharted waters of checking the
Jewish connection behind the developments in the US and the Middle East,
such an essay would not be needed. One could talk about Israel with
admiration, or at worst with regret that she lost her youthful idealism. One
could not even notice the new American Jewish elite of the superpower who
directed every bullet of Israeli snipers and every bomb dropped by the US
planes on Iraq and Afghanistan. Things had changed.
Buruma admits that "the idea that Jewish interests are somehow at the center
of American foreign policy in the Middle East is widely held, and not only
outside the United States". He tries to pooh-pooh it, but he is painfully
aware of peeling Stealth cover of the American Judeocracy. Once revealed,
this peculiar form of social organisation, akin to Brahmin predominance in
India, became obvious to millions of spectators. The ever-watchful
Anti-Defamation League (ADL) also noticed "hateful conspiracy theories .
about Jews continue to gather force around the world . despite two years of
intensive efforts by watchdog groups and democratic governments to combat
them"[2] But "a "conspiracy theory" is not prima facie absurd, at any rate
in Anglo-American jurisprudence. Indeed, "participation in a common plan or
conspiracy" to commit aggression was the centrepiece of the prosecution's
indictment at the Nuremberg trial", writes Norman Finkelstein[3]
The conspiracy of silence was undermined by the 'Jewish' dissidents: Norman
Finkelstein, Miriam Reik, Jeff Blankfort, Michael Neumann, Gilad Atzmon,
Edward Herman, Israel Shahak together with their 'gentile' comrades, for the
'Jewish conspiracy' works for the interests of the organised Jewish
leadership, and against the true interests of ordinary folk of Jewish
origin. More to the point, there is no Jew or Gentile but brotherhood of
humanity for whoever accepts this brotherhood.
But their effort and self-sacrifice will be lost unless supported by others.
Or, in words of Samuel Adams, "It does not require a majority to prevail,
but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's
minds."
If Ian Buruma 'walked on eggs', wonderful Arundhati Roy in her ode to
equally wonderful Noam Chomsky did not even come close to the eggs. She
noticed "the mainstream media's blatant performance as the U.S. government's
mouthpiece, its display of vengeful patriotism, its willingness to publish
Pentagon press handouts as news, and its explicit censorship". She noticed
that the United States can commit horrible crimes and escape condemnation
because "it has enlisted the services of the most powerful, most successful
publicity firm in the world: Hollywood". But she circumspectly does not
notice the American Jews who are predominant in the media and Hollywood.
Out of two dozens of Media moguls she carefully mentions a non-Jewish one,
although a friend of Israel, Berlusconi. She justly condemns 'Neoliberal
capitalism' without referring to Milton Friedman and genocidal bombing of
Cambodia without the name of Henry Kissinger. She writes of "the key role
America has played in the conflict in the Middle East, in which thousands
have died fighting Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory" but
avoids the real reason behind this American role: the mighty power of the
Jewish Lobby, as attended and duly described by Noam Chomsky's co-author of
Manufacturing Consent, fearless Edward Herman (alas, he remained unmentioned
in her piece).
She speaks of the war and preceding "sanctions that have led directly, and
indirectly, to the death of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq" but
does not notice the [self-styled] Cabal, these 25 people, in words of Thomas
Friedman to Ari Shavit ["Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25
people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this
office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half
ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.[4]"] who caused the war, and
almost all of them Jewish disciples of Leo Strauss and their schoolmates.
Indeed, it is like talking of India's policy in 19th century without
mentioning the British rule. Could it be that for an Indian writer, the
Brahmins' leading role goes without saying? But our problem is exactly that:
the huge monopoly of media causing lack of democracy in the US. The monopoly
should receive the same treatment the giant Standard Oil received in the
beginning of 20th century: it should be broken and democratised. |
