Congressman Joe Walsh has a sure-fire way to end the Palestinian/Israeli conflict: Palestinians move to Jordan, and those who don’t move reconcile themselves to permanent second-class status. As Robert Wright notes,
Offhand, I don’t recall a member of Congress in my lifetime saying anything so grotesquely at odds with American ideals about ethnic relations and for that matter basic human rights. Will the Anti-Defamation League denounce Walsh? Will the American Jewish Committee? Will AIPAC have anything to say about the congressman whose strongly pro-Israel views its newsletter approvingly highlighted? If not, why not? (“Congressman endorses ethnic cleansing, apartheid for Palestinians“; The Atlantic)
Walsh’s proposal contravenes the entire zeitgeist of Jewish intellectual and political activism in the West. It dovetails nicely with Newt Gingrich’s statement during the Republican primaries that the Palestinians already have a state: Jordan. Except that Gingrich apparently would like the Palestinians to be expelled.
The mere fact that Walsh could propose such a thing is a telling sign of Jewish power. There is no other group in the entire world whose permanent subordination could be advocated by a US politician.
But there will be no outrage by Jewish activist organizations, even though they are a major support for utopian multiculturalism in the US and even though they routinely act as arbiter on statements related to Israel by US politicians. The Jabotinskyists are in charge in Israel, and, given Israeli demographic trends favoring the religious and secular ethnonationalists, there is no going back. The Israel Lobby will support whatever Israel does.
Walsh’s statement is a trial balloon—an attempt to get us used to the idea that such a move would be acceptable to the US political establishment, if not the rest of the world. Ideas like this have a great future. In a way, Walsh is simply being realistic. It’s really hard to see any other outcome that would please Israel and its fifth column in the US. Might as well get used to it.
And when the Palestinian question is solved by expulsion, or by voluntarily leaving for Jordan and becoming permanent second-class citizens in Israel, the organized Jewish community must square the circle by continuing to enforce obeisance by US politicians combined with a silenced media.
But that is definitely doable. Here’s another example from a recent article by Christopher Ketcham who convincingly argues that there was huge pressure to prevent media coverage of the Israeli Mossad agents who were caught high-fiving in the immediate aftermath of 1/11 (“What did Israel know in advance of the 9/11 attacks?“).
Before such issues had been fully explored, however, the investigation was shut down. Following what ABC News reported were “high-level negotiations between Israeli and U.S. government officials”, a settlement was reached in the case of the five Urban Moving Systems suspects. Intense political pressure apparently had been brought to bear. The reputable Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that by the last week of October 2001, some six weeks after the men had been detained, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and two unidentified “prominent New York congressmen” were lobbying heavily for their release. According to a source at ABC News close to the 20/20 report, high-profile criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz also stepped in as a negotiator on behalf of the men to smooth out differences with the U.S. government. (Dershowitz declined to comment for this article.) And so, at the end of November 2001, for reasons that only noted they had been working in the country illegally as movers, in violation of their visas, the men were flown home to Israel.
What’s incendiary is the idea – supported, though not proven, by several pieces of evidence – that the Israelis did learn something about 9/11 in advance but failed to share all of what they knew with American officials. The questions are disturbing enough to warrant a Congressional investigation. …
Yet none of this information found its way into Congress’s joint committee report on the attacks, and it was not even tangentially referenced in the nearly 600 pages of the 9/11 Commission’s final report. Nor would a single major media outlet track the revelations of The Forward and ABC News to investigate further. “There weren’t even stories saying it was bull***”, says The Forward’s Perelman. “Honestly, I was surprised”. Instead, the story disappeared into the welter of anti-Israel 9/11 conspiracy theories.
So a credible aspect of a very serious attack on the US and an eventual motive for the Iraq war (massively promoted by the Israel Lobby—no wonder the Israelis were happy!) simply disappears from public consciousness, relegated to one of those theories that only crazy anti-Semites believe.
I take it that these two recent examples are quite persuasive that Jews do indeed have quite a bit of power. And, of course, that’s only the tip of the iceberg. But the ADL continues to put out surveys where public attitudes that Jews have too much power (e.g., here, on Europe) are simply labeled as “anti-Semitic”—no attempt deal with the factual basis of such attitudes. Another recent report on anti-Semitism “defines anti-Semitism as social prejudice directed against Jews simply because they are Jews,” but then goes on to note that anti-Semitism includes perceptions that Jews have too much power. Again, there is no assessment of how much power Jews actually have.
A group that can effectively silence any public discussion of credible evidence of Israeli foreknowledge of 9/11—with all the ramifications such a discussion would have for evaluating the war in Iraq and the diplomatic and military support the US gives to Israel—is powerful indeed. The same goes for their ability to be a pillar of utopian multiculturalism in the West while also being able to rally support for an ethnonationalist, expansionist Israel dedicated to apartheid and ethnic cleansing. Anyone who doesn’t realize that is simply not paying attention.