|
Biden’s Intent Is To Sow Chaos – Netanyahoo And Zelensky Are Working For Him
There is a great believe peddled by main stream media that the Biden administration is trying to hold the Zionists back from their devastating action in Gaza, Lebanon and beyond, but unfortunately fails to do so. Some commentators argue that this is the case because the Israel lobby has a very strong position in U.S. policies and can direct the U.S. government into any direction of its liking.
My hunch is that this is putting the cart before the horse.
It is in fact the Biden administration which is using the Israeli (and Ukrainian) government to serve its foreign policy purposes. As I remarked:
This has been the general theme of a media campaign for a while. "Natanyahoo is steamrolling Biden and the poor guy can do nothing about it."
I do not buy it. One phone call from the White House to the Pentagon would hold resupply flights from the U.S. to Israel. Without constant supply renewal the Israeli Air Force would have to stop its bombing campaigns in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen within days if not within hours.
But instead of calling the Pentagon, the whole Middle East team around Biden, Antony Blinken, Brett McGurk and IDF soldier Amos Hochstein, has been urging Israel to extend its campaign.
They are hoping, like the neoconservatives in 2006 during the Bush administration, for the 'birth pangs of a new Middle East', which will forever change the strategic situation on the ground.
…
The conclusion from this is that Netanyahoo is largely doing exactly what the Biden administration wants him to do.
Gilbert Doctorow, the well known historian and journalist, is of similar opinion:
More on tails wagging dogs and vice versa
Some viewers/readers support my contention that the United States is using Israel as its proxy in the Middle East and is not just enabling but even directing Israel’s rampage in the region to ‘kick ass’ generally and to reinforce American dominance there in line with American global hegemony. Far from being outraged by the Israeli atrocities, the U.S. government is satisfied to see Israel take revenge for the many humiliations that the United States has suffered in the Middle East, most recently in the disorderly and disgraceful pull-out from Afghanistan but going back, say, 40 years to the hostage taking at the American embassy in Teheran by the new revolutionary Iranian leadership there that overthrew the American backed Shah.
Others in my audience have not hesitated to say that they think I am wrong, and that indeed Prime Minister Netanyahu is leading Joe Biden & Company around by the nose, which just happens to be the consensus view in mainstream media.
Most of this discussion is not visible to the broad public. However, the ‘Judging Freedom’ channel which has 450,000 subscribers and its host, Judge Andrew Napolitano put my proposition on the dog (USA) wagging the tail (Israel) to several of his best-known panelists in the 24 hours following my interview with him. To be sure, my idea seemed so ‘contrarian’ that it demanded a response from the mightiest minds in the alternative media camp. They obliged. With one exception, the mightiest minds were dismissive of my interpretation in more respectful, less respectful ways.
…
Professor John Mearsheimer and Larry Johnson are two of the guest on the Napolitano show who reject Doctorow's thesis.
However, Doctorow and I are not the only ones delving into this conundrum. Professor of history at Columbia University Adam Tooze, a rather famous commentator, joined us with his current Guardian comment:
Facing war in the Middle East and Ukraine, the US looks feeble. But is it just an act?
There is one school of thought that says the Biden administration is muddling through. It has no grand plan. It lacks the will or the means to discipline or direct either the Ukrainians or the Israelis. As a result, it is mainly focused on avoiding a third world war.
…
But what if that interpretation is too benign? What if it underestimates the intentionality on Washington’s part? What if key figures in the administration actually see this as a history-defining moment and an opportunity to reshape the balance of world power? What if what we are witnessing is the pivoting of the US to a deliberate and comprehensive revisionism by way of a strategy of tension?
Revisionist powers are those that want to overturn the existing state of things. In an extended sense, this can also mean a desire to alter the flow of events; for instance, to redirect or halt the process of globalisation. Revisionism is often associated with resentment or nostalgia for an earlier, better age.
Tooze digs down into the various action the Biden administration has taken against Russia, China and in the Middle East. He concludes:
In all three arenas – China, Ukraine and the Middle East – the US will say that it is responding to aggression. But rather than working consistently for a return to the status quo it is, in fact, raising the stakes. While insisting that it supports the rules-based order, what we are witnessing is something closer to a revival of the ruinous neoconservative ambition of the 1990s and 2000s.
…
[T]here is more going on here than simply muddling through. First the Trump and now the Biden presidencies are willing contributors to the controlled demolition of the 1990s post-cold war order.
People seem to have forgotten that Biden was never a liberal in the progressive sense. Since being a freshman in Congress Biden has always been on the conservative side of things:
Alliances With Segregationists
1975: Mr. Biden joined Senator Jesse Helms, a Republican segregationist from North Carolina, in supporting an anti-busing amendment to an education spending bill. When the amendment failed, Mr. Biden wrote a narrower measure that prevented schools from using federal dollars to assign teachers or students by race. It passed, 50-43.
In a television interview, Mr. Biden called busing an “asinine concept” and said he had “gotten to the point where I think our only recourse to eliminate busing may be a constitutional amendment.”
In 2002 Biden was joined at the hip with the neoconservatives when he, as the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, feverishly argued for launching the war on Iraq:
In a speech days before the 2002 [Iraq war] vote, Bush did say approving the resolution “does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable,” but he also laid out in detail why military action “may” be needed. And on the day the war broke out, Biden acknowledged, “We voted to give him the authority to wage that war. We should step back and be supportive.”
When the Biden administration is sowing global chaos the way it currently does, it is acting along a path which Biden has long favored and with the intent to sow chaos, not because this or that outside power is pressing him to do so.
Not This Again!
“Biden’s Intent Is To Sow Chaos – It Is Netanyahoo Who Works For Him“ (Moon of Alabama). Utter nonsense! I say this as someone who has eyes to see and ears to hear. Trump is constantly boasting about the money Adelson is giving him, and what the ‘Jews’ are going to get in return (Trump being Trump, he pretty much says this in so many words, and often!). If you look at the list of top donors to both parties, well, then you know whose interests the politicians work for. Those lists don’t include the illegal bribes. We know who controls the (((media))), with some cases, e.g., CNN, the bias by its Jewish employees being risible. We know all about Epstein, and his still mostly hidden client lists, and more similar operations are still hidden (but are coming out – see, Diddy, and the (((people))) behind him). Finally, anybody with half a brain can see that the cumulative effect of all the Wars For The Jews, and Jewish control over the US, is destroying hegemonic power in real time. Each day there is a new humiliation, and each one can be directly tied to Jewish influence.
Why do you think the Jews spend hundreds of millions of dollars – probably over a billion a year if you add everything up – on buying influence if they don’t think they are getting real value for their money? If the American policy makers would make the same decisions anyway, as these decisions are in real American national interests, why not save this money?
‘Israel’ has had absolutely no strategic importance for the US since the end of the Cold War, and arguably was of no help to the US during the Cold War, and has been dragging down the US like an anchor for decades. Just imagine if the US had ignored ‘Israel’ and set up normal trade and other relations with countries around the world, places like undestroyed Iran, and Libya, and Syria, and Iraq (and including Russia, an ‘enemy’ only because the (((neocons))) have used the Jewish control of America to have the US fight their traditional Khazar war on Russia and Ukraine).
What ‘Israel’ is doing, and the further monstrosities it intends to do, with the support of something approaching 100% of World Jews, is now seen by the world, and has led inexorably to an understanding of the mechanics of power. The sheer enormity of the slaughter and genocides, available for the world to see, is unprecedented. It is not normal for the US, even given ts violent history, to support something of such PR destructiveness. The reputation of the US, which has survived a lot of American brutality, is now dirt, and having that kind of reputation is going to have real costs for rich Americans, the kind of people who usually control political decisions. The fact that they are helpless in the face of Jewish bribery and blackmail power should be instructive.
What is true is that the corrosive effects of decades of Jewish corruption have created a gentile bureaucratic and academic structure which supports (((neocon))) thinking, and this underpinning is used by the tricksters to try to fool you into thinking that the façade is the reality of power. It is also true that weaknesses in the American structure of government have made the corruption more dangerous. Finally, there are old trends in American thinking, things like Russophobia going back to the Cold War, and hatred of Iran going back to the revolution in Iran, which the Jews have been able to exploit and emphasize in getting what they want. It is, however, undeniable that the American Empire is fading, fast, and the deterioration has been accelerated by the fact that American policy makers now consistently make choices against actual American interests, and those choices are forced by Jewish bribes and blackmail and (((media))) control. If you don’t believe me, why is every choice American policy makers make so dumb from an American national interest point of view, and so obviously dumb in real time?
The (((bad guys))) are fully aware that ‘Israel’ is going to do much worse things in the pursuit of ‘Greater Israel’, the whole world is going to see it and react in horror, and the truth can no longer be hidden. Truth is even coming out in weird places like the show of Piers Morgan. Random Jews are suddenly complaining about the growth of ‘anti-Semitism’, which is people suddenly grasping cause and effect!
Source: https://xymphora.blogspot.com/2024/10/not-this-again.html
And Also
I should add a little to my last post. Besides the massive amount of hard data we have in front of us about actual bribery and blackmail of American politicians by Jews, and the essentially 100% control of the (((media)) by Jews, by far the most striking evidence of the thesis of Jewish control is the undeniable fact of American hegemonic decline, based on an amazing series of horrible policy decisions, starting with the decisions to start various disastrous Wars For The Jews in the wake of 9/11. All of these were encouraged by a group of policy-deciding (((neocons))), and each of them has left the American empire seriously weakened, and the American people much worse off. All of these disasters were predicted at the time, and were obvious, but did benefit larger Zionist planning (e.g., Yinon).
Now we’re told that Joe Biden – the mastermind Joe Biden! – is manipulating ‘Israel’ for American hegemonic interests. In fact, Joe Biden has not got two neurons to rub together, and all these ‘American’ decisions are made by a guy called (((Antony Blinken))), not only a Jew, but a man with a family background which can only be described as Zionist royalty. What are the fucking odds? Not to mention the massive number of Jews in the rest of Biden’s cabinet, and the fact that his main roaming Middle East negotiator is an ex-IDF guy and an ‘Israeli’ citizen (Blinken is also probably an ‘Israeli’ citizen, making it impossible to see how he could have obtained his security clearance), who just happens to fail miserably at every peace initiative he tries. Each day of failure is another day of permanently lost American reputation, but another day of Jewish ethnic cleansing.
The results of this mastermind manipulation by Joe Biden is probably the US war with Iran that Netanyahu has been angling for for years, leading to a possible world nuclear war with Russia and China, and the certain energy collapse of the world economy. The Zionists will get what they want, but how in the sweet fuck is any of this in American national interests?
There is such massive, massive evidence against the Doctorow thesis that I really have to wonder what is going on.
Source: https://xymphora.blogspot.com/2024/10/and-also.html
Posted by: Balderdashbuster | Oct 10 2024 15:30 utc | 56
@ Ahenobarbus | Oct 10 2024 15:20 utc | 50
Yes, the last year has really brought a lot of the Zionist influence into the open, and also revealed and deepened many fissures in the US government and other institutions, as well as among the Jews and other communities.
To my surprise, it was the Congress more than any other institution that, with the exception of a relatively few persons, has shown its absolute fealty to Zionism and Israel in the last year. It is there that reside all the screaming banshee proponents of nuclear war, “Nuke this,” and “Nuke that,” sentiments that are not generally echoed in the mainstream media. So this shows where the bulk of Zionist effort and money has been devoted, to control the Middle East foreign policy of the US government and to exclude any dissension there.
Of course, the media remain an arm of the imperialists who control the government, but I was surprised that, while they remained biased in favor of Israel, trying to craft subtle narratives to defend and justify Israel, they also gave some space to counternarratives. Partly this arose because the Zionists were so bowled over by the turn of events when the affair began that they were left sputtering and scarcely able to respond. Now they have come back on the counterattack, but they are still in disarray and unable to come up with an actual justification for the genocide, so they try instead to suppress all discussion of it, which hasn’t worked very well, yet. Please don’t think I have a soft spot for the MSM: I think they are loathsome snakes, I can’t stand to watch any of them even for a minute, and if I met one of them, it would be hard to restrain myself from punching them in the face. But we need to carefully analyze what is going on, and the fact is that while the congresscreatures have largely adopted the exact line of Ben-Gvir and other Zionist maximalists, the media have refrained from that. Therefore, there is more direct maximalist Zionist control over the Congress than over the media.
Some of the same fissures exist among the Jews. I have frequently commented here about the anti-Zionist Jewish opposition, which, while a minority still among the Jews, is not insignificant and has at least to be in range of 10-15% and more like 25-30% among the US Jewish youth. Because they are moved more to act in this crisis because of their being Jews and thus more connected with it, those anti-Zionist Jews constitute a major part — if not the major part — of the opposition to what is happening, especially in demonstrations and so on.
Among the Zionist Jews and Zionist fellow travelers among the Jews, there are also a lot of divisions. Most of the Jews are just silent about the whole thing, not wanting to provoke the Zionist enforcers in their community to single them out nor to try to defend the undefendable. Some of the media characters are like this, such as Trudy Rubin here in our city’s Philadelphia Inquirer, who blames Netanyahu for everything. That is a convenient way out, just like all blaming of single historical figures for historical phenomena: Biden, Trump, Putin, Saddam Husayn, etc., an always-false shorthand for self-justification. So the liberal Zionists seek an out now by blaming Netanyahu. Of course, they can’t quite disown the Gaza genocide, but they really don’t want to own it either. From the viewpoint of the Palestinian victims, this may be entirely irrelevant and useless, but nevertheless it may be develop into other unforeseen things as the future unfolds.
Posted by: Cabe | Oct 10 2024 16:14 utc | 87
There is no question that b is right on this because all the facts, taken together, in historical perspective and at present, conclusively show that Israel is implementing US policies in the region, now, as it has for decades.
It is so obvious that only the ideologically blinded, the ignorant and the wilfully blind don’t see it, or refuse to accept it.
If the point is to look at the facts in order to understand (not to defend one’s beliefs, or prove to be’ right’) the facts are merciless.
The reason why this is very important is simple – clarity about what is happening, who is doing what and where responsibility lies.
I want to make two observations :
– Many, or maybe most, commentators and analysts who have expressed themselves on this are describing the surface, the appearance of relations between US and Israel as presented in the media, or by sources they consider relevant, which usually tell them the same thing that the media are regurgitating. These are typically Western sources.
No reliance on what knowledgeable people from the region, who also know how the West and the world works, have to say. People who have spent years studying the developments in the region. They are ignored. Everything about the region is seen through the Western perspective, in Western interpretation and Western description of Western actions, goals and intentions in the region and beyond.
– Relations between a master state that supports another state(let) so that it fulfills the goals of the master state are complex. There are, and always will be, different views and interests in both states that go into defining goals and policy. The same applies to US/Israel, which, by the way, is existentially dependent on the US.
Anyone who knows how state policy is formulated and adopted, knows that these different views and interests clash and try to prevail. But when the course is set, it is set.
(There are many declassified US documents, and those on wikileaks, that show how US policy is made.)
For around six decades US policy (the course) has been – iron clad support for Israel, emphasized also now by the current US establishment. Why? Because the US has become and extension of Israel? Or because without Israel, propped up and armed, by the US, West Asia would be a different place and US control of the strategic waterways and the energy resources there would have to be enforced differently.
Israel made it “easy” for the US and the Western imperialists because, by its Zionist, terrorist nature, Israel is a constant menace to the regional states, enabling the US and the Western plunderers to employ the tested formula – divide and conquer. Actually, to solidify all they had already grabbed before Israel was invented, and to make sure the status quo remains forever in their favor.
This was successful until 7 October 2023 shattered the forever dream.
Iran was always an obstacle, so the US/Israel and their Western partners are doing everything they can to portray Iran as the enemy of the states in the region, as opposed to Israel.
Iran survived everything done to it, and emerged as a stable, responsible and rapidly developing state, with a principled foreign policy based on independence and sovereignty guided by national interests, with peace as the primary one. According to the Western beacons of democracy, however, Iran is the belligerent threat to the region, and Israel is the peacekeeper.
Iran, strategically located, independent and opposed to foreign (US) presence and interference in the region must be vanquished. That has been on the US agenda for a very long time, according to US officials active and retired. And Israel is to deliver. Quite gladly as we know, and the US will more than gladly enable it with all it has and Israel needs.
Could Israel do this without the US? Would Israel do this without the US? Is Israel dragging the US into a war(s) it does not want? Can such a claim, on the entirety of the facts, be made with straight face.
When you work with tools you have to keep them polished and in shape if they are to do what you use them for. It takes patience, time and money, the bigger the task the more hassle and money.
Posted by: JB | Oct 10 2024 16:24 utc | 96
Michael A 79 guttural attack; “What the fuck is “CCP”? Have you been listening to the fat shitpile Alex Jones too much, or watching the hasbara excrement of China Uncensored?”
Rather than respond with an equally uneducated utterance I offer what people who have followed China since the “cultural revolution” wreaked havoc by insisting there was but one truth under Mao Zedong.
===================================================
CCP or CPC
April 6, 2023
Source: China Media Project https://u.osu.edu/mclc/2023/04/06/ccp-or-cpc/
CCP or CPC: A China Watchers’ Rorschach
The choice to use either CCP or CPC for China’s ruling Communist Party has become politically charged, but how did this distinction arise — and does it even matter?
By Ryan Ho Kilpatrick
On a cold January evening in 1931, He Yeduo (贺页朵) pledged his life to the Chinese Communist Party. The 45-year-old Jiangxi peasant was barely literate, but at the oath-swearing ceremony on a Red Army base in the Jinggang Mountains, the “cradle of the Chinese revolution,” he took out a piece of red cloth and began writing.
A quarter of the Chinese characters he wrote, professing his faith to the then-embattled and apparently doomed guerrilla forces in his native province, were misspelled. But at the top of the cloth, now regarded as a divine relic of the revolution, are three perfectly formed letters, the name of the organization he would die for: “C.C.P.”
Nine decades later, these three letters have become an unacceptable slur to many supporters of He’s beloved Chinese Communist Party.
On state-run CCTV’s
Win at the Museum
a child recounts the heroic tale behind He Yeduo’s oath.
Acronym Acrimony
“CCP”s fall from the sacred to the profane can be cataloged by an emerging discourse in pro-CCP online circles demanding foreign scholars, journalists, politicians, and everyday internet users defer to the more recent translation currently favored by the Party: the “Communist Party of China,” or “CPC.”
Nationalist tabloid the Global Times suggested in December 2022 that the word “Chinese” is a racist dog whistle. A 2021 article in Australia’s Canberra Times argued that the acronym CCP makes the “racist” and “ludicrous” suggestion that “all [Chinese] share the same political beliefs” — a suggestion that the Party itself, which routinely claims to enjoy the “wholehearted support of all Chinese people,” may not find so offensive, if it were being made at all. Across social media platforms, the CCP’s supporters have also taken to branding those who write “CCP” as anti-China, and thereby fair game for mockery or disregard.
Interestingly, however, Chinese-language accounts from state media and even the Party itself do not share the same venom over this — for some, anyway — emotionally charged debate. A post from the Communist Party’s official CPC News (www.cpcnews.cn) website describes the distinction between the two acronyms as such:
Both CPC and CCP refer to the Communist Party of China — it’s merely that the officially recognized wording domestically is CPC… Some foreign media continue to use CCP […] but that doesn’t mean that every article using CCP is negative and every article using CPC is positive; whether it is negative or positive depends upon the specifics of its content.
The terminally-online acrimony over acronyms may be recent but the distinction itself, as the article explains, is not. According to official accounts, the Party made the move from CCP to CPC 80 years ago.
A Historic Reshuffle
“Overthrow the power of the capitalist class,” “eradicate capitalism,” and “join the Comintern”: these were part of the First Program passed by the Chinese Communist Party on the day it was founded in the French Concession of Shanghai on July 21, 1921.
The third item should hardly come as a surprise. Two agents of the Communist International, also known as the Third International, were present at the clandestine meeting and had been instrumental in organizing it. In the CCP’s early years, the Comintern’s Far Eastern Bureau had a profound — and welcome — influence on the Party. At the time, Communists the world over saw themselves as members of a single, global political movement with its central nervous system in Moscow.
Soviet guidance ensured that Leninism beat out more popular schools of leftist thinking such as anarchism. It also pushed the Communists into a tenuous United Front with the Kuomintang. But as time went on, patience with these European advisors wore thin, and a “native Communist” faction stressing the Sinification of Marxism and peasant revolution rose to prominence under Mao Zedong.
The Long March from the Jinggang Mountains to the dugouts of Yan’an was a key moment in this power struggle, with Mao’s guerrilla warfare strategy emerging triumphant from the Zunyi Conference. The influence of the Comintern agents and their Soviet-trained allies was still alive, but just barely. The death blow came in 1943, at the same moment as we are told the change from CCP to CPC occurred.
An article in the Southeastern Daily (東南日報) describes how, after the dissolution of the Third International, “Comintern members returned to their home countries to fight for leadership of their domestic communist parties” and “declared they were fighting for the national interest and no longer took orders from Moscow.”
Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union meant that Moscow joined the side of the Allies in 1941, and it would not do for the Comintern to be actively fomenting revolution in the countries the USSR now fought beside. Many Communists had already been driven away by the pressures to enable Naziism at the expense of their countries in the years of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and on May 15, 1943, the sword dropped: The Third International officially dissolved. The workers of the world had to find their own way.
The demise of the Third International made Mao’s triumph all but a fait accompli: Wang Ming (王明), his Moscow-trained main rival, was cut off from his base of support; China was forced to forge ahead with its own revolution on its own terms; and a cult of personality coalesced around the newly christened “Chairman” Mao. It was a political earthquake for China, but the tremors were felt all around the world.
In the ensuing scramble out of Moscow’s shadow, communist parties the world over created new identities for themselves. The Chinese Communist Party was one of them, rechristening itself, so the official histories say, the Communist Party of China. CPC News again:
From the perspective of linguistic analysis […] “of China” is more focused on the Party’s property of “belonging to China,” emphasizing this subordinate relationship. “Chinese” means “related to China,” focusing more on the properties of it being a Communist Party, which weakens its subordinate relationship to China.
Apparatchiks’ desire to nominally distance themselves from the Comintern and foreground their national identity is understandable. Many other communist parties were doing the same. But their unique “linguistic analysis” presents a more impenetrable logic.
Indeed, every other major communist party rebranding themselves for this same reason in 1943 moved in the other direction, taking their home country from the backs of their names to the most important position according to their own “linguistic analysis”: the front.
Thus in 1943 the Communist Party of Italy became the Italian Communist Party and the French Section of the Communist International became the French Communist Party. When West Germany’s Communists regrouped in the 1960s they also changed their party’s name from the Communist Party of Germany to the German Communist Party. In all these cases, too, the new English names were incidental to the new names in their native tongues. The CCP, uniquely, only changed the official English translation of its name. In Chinese, it is the same today as it was in 1921: 中国共产党 (literally, “China Communist Party”).
Consistently Inconsistent
Some scholars question this official account that the switch from CCP to CPC occurred as early as 1943, noting the persistence of “CCP” in official language for decades thereafter.
“[CCP] is what I first encountered when I read Peking Review in the 1960s, and later when I read English translations of the Chinese Party’s attacks on the Soviets in the 1950s,” says Australian sinologist Geremie Barmé. “Then there were the Nine Critiques of the 1960s, translated at the time into English as well. That’s just to mention just a few. So the line about 1943 is nice enough, but from my experience not accurate.”…
Posted by: S Brennan | Oct 10 2024 16:26 utc | 98
|
