What someone wrote about Israel and America

[WanderingProtagonist]

It came from this link, one of the comments so I decided to post it here just to get what @Lucas88 has to say on it, but anyone else can join to. Sorry I don't remember all of you guys names by heart. And I do agree with the statement about Israel having Nukes, that they are safe from any attack from a full scale Jihad. Although I've heard someone say that if all of the Middle East go full Jihad mode the U.S. and Israel wouldn't stand a chance, but any nation attempting to use nuclear weapons is honestly a threat to all of humanity. They are tools to instill fear into people. Which is probably one of the main reasons Israel feels that it can do whatever it wants and everyone must be willing to submit to them. On top of it all, they truly do act like they are the only people that experienced some kind of atrocity in history.

https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S ... ll_reviews

This is really a fascinating book that is sure to cause many heated debates. For one, the authors have already been labeled anti-Semites. According to the authors, anyone with views that go against the interests of the Jewish State Israel is immediately accused of being anti-Semite. Jimmy Carter was accused of being an anti-Semite for pointing out the brutality the Jewish Israelis bestow on the Palestinians in his book `Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid'. Don't be surprised to see comments on this site accusing reviewers, who are merely pointing out their views or simply reviewing this book, to be anti-Semite. As one reviewer correctly pointed out, opposing Bush doesn't make someone anti-American just as opposing Sharon, Netanyahu, Barak and Olmert doesn't make someone anti-Semite. The authors say, "Indeed, there are signs that the reflexive charge of anti-Semitism is beginning to lose its power to stifle debate." (p. 195). The authors further say, "Let us be clear: anti-Semitism is a despicable phenomenon with a long and tragic history, and all people should remain vigilant against its resurgence and condemn it when it arises...But it is essential that we distinguish between true anti-Semitism and legitimate criticism of Israeli policy..." (p. 196).

Another accusation I often see is a comment that the reviewer did not read the book. Because the reviewer's point of view does not correspond with the reader's, do we conclude that the reviewer did not read the book? It is our right, at least from a democratic viewpoint, to express our views and beliefs without prejudice.

Jews believe that because they have suffered so much during their history, especially recently during the Holocaust, which is one of the most horrific periods in modern history, that special treatment must be given to them. In that case special treatment should be given to all people of the earth. Are you honestly going to tell me that the black slaves suffered less than the Jews? Or that the innocent Japanese men, women and children who either died by atomic radiation or lived for years together with their off spring with radiation poising fared better than the Jews during the holocaust? What about the atrocities committed in the Gulag and the extermination of the North and South American indigenous Indians? Ever hear of the Zápara? When Henry Ford figured out how to mass-produce automobiles, the demand for inflatable tubes and tires soon found ambitious Europeans heading up every navigable Amazonian stream, claiming land with rubber trees and seizing indigenous slave laborers to tap them. In Ecuador, the Zápara men were chained to trees and made to work until they fell dead of exhaustion. Zápara women and girls, taken as breeders or sex slaves, were raped to death. After this rubber genocide only a few hundred Zápara were left alive, out of hundreds of thousands! Anyone lately is talking about the Zápara Holocaust?

History is filled with atrocities committed against mankind. No one nation or race fared better than another--each had their share of atrocities. Today, it is the Palestinians' turn to taste the evil that man does, and by no other than a race who knows better than the rest of us in recent history what suffering is! John Donne sums it up nicely in the following poem:

No man is an island, entire of itself
every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main
if a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were,
as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were
any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls
it tolls for thee.

One would think that the Jewish people would be the kindest and most understanding people in the world. They have been through the most atrocious experience recently during World War II and the evil of Hitler during the Holocaust. Even before Hitler Jews were persecuted and discriminated against in Europe. Their history is also one of hardship since its beginnings some 5,000 years ago. Yet, according to the authors, the Jewish Israelis are very brutal towards their Palestinian neighbors. Not only has their land been taken in the 1940s, they are still confiscating Palestinian land and building settlements on them, and murdering women and children in the process. This is really sad and surprising, given the Jewish people would be the ones most understanding about human suffering, and what it is like being persecuted, being left without a nation, discriminated against, and murdered! This is the Palestinian Holocaust!

The Jewish religion is a beautiful religion, and the root of the two other great religions--Christianity and Islam. It is a monotheistic religion, and Jews know well that upsetting God or going against his will--or in other words, sinning--has grave consequences on them, as their history in the last five thousand years has shown. Furthermore, both Islam and the Jews regard Prophet Abraham as their father. The Jews are descendants of one of Prophet Abraham's son, while the Moslems are descendant of another of Abraham's sons. Jews and Muslims are therefore cousins. This has been shown today by DNA testing. One can also go further back in history and claim that both Jews and Muslims are descendants of Adam and Eve, whom both believe to be the first humans. So why all this bloodshed between cousins, and between people kneeling everyday to the same God and following the teachings of the same prophets (Muslims believe in all of the Jewish prophets)? Is all this fighting for land? Is it worth burning in hell (Jews believe in hell) for the sake of calling a piece of land theirs? Isn't this a materialistic view, as opposed to a spiritual one?

The authors point out that the majority of the people living in Palestine before 1940 were Muslim Arab Palestinians. After the war against them by the Jews and the formation of the Jewish State, Israel, Jews slowly started catching up with the Palestinian population. This is not because their birth rate gave them an advantage, quite the contrary, but because the present majority of the Jews living in the occupied territories are not native to this land, but came mainly from Russia and Europe. Modern Jews were therefore imported into Palestine. This is a conquest of a land they were not living on in the first place--sort of like the Europeans taking the land of the American Indians and today claiming it is theirs. In other words, the majority of the Jews living in what was formerly known as Palestine are not indigenous to this land.

So the authors ask, `why is the United States supporting Israel?' The authors make clear from the beginning that should the sovereignty of Israel be threatened, the United States should come to its aid. But why is Israel receiving special treatment from the United States when it is behaving in ways contrary to American ethics and democratic values? As the authors, as well as Jimmy Carter, point out, the brutal treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli army goes against all American values and ethics. Yet the United Stated blindly supports Israel, even when it is not to its national interest. In fact, no country in the world receives such a special treatment from the US. The authors say, "Since 1976, six Israeli leaders have addressed joint sessions of Congress, a higher total than for any other country. A trivial indicator, perhaps, but it is still striking given that these six leaders represented a country whose 2007 population was less than that of New York City... Yitzhak Rabin was right: America's generosity toward Israel is 'beyond compare in modern history'...the United States and Israel may well have the most extraordinary tie in international politics." (p. 48).

The authors point out that it would be better for the US to distance itself from Israel, and to oppose Israel when it behaves in an immoral way, just like it does with other countries of the world. But as the authors point out, this is not an easy task given the Israel lobby on US land.

US politicians are afraid of the Israel lobby. The Israel lobby can tip the balance on whether a certain senator or president is elected! And no US politician can criticize Israel in fear of being labeled an anti-Semite! Yet it is Israel that is a very racist country. The authors point out recent polls where the majority of the Israelis view the Palestinians as an unclean and inferior people. This is how whites viewed blacks during slavery. The authors also point out that the Palestinians live in a big jail and at the mercy of Israel for food, water, medicine, electricity, and fuel. No one can enter or leave Palestine without the permission of Israel. The Palestinians living in Israel, and thus holders of Israeli passports, are discriminated against. They are treated by the government as a second class people, with neglect, oppression and suspicion. This permanent second-class status contradicts the idea of a multi-ethnic society which Americans associate which freedom and democracy.

The authors emphasize that Jews have a right to exist in a state of their own within internationally recognized borders but so do the Palestinians. However, according to the authors, Israel is a state determined to colonize all of Palestine, to deny Palestinians their rights, and to dominate the region, and thus to avoid peace. The authors point out that since the present policies of the state of Israel, many of which are condemned worldwide as illegal and immoral, do not conform to international law and UN resolutions, they should no longer be supported by the US, for this would be dangerous for the future of the country for it encourages hatred and terrorism directed toward the US. The authors say, "in fact a good case could be made that current U.S. policy conflicts with basic American values and if the United States were to choose sides on the basis of moral considerations alone, it would back the Palestinians, not Israel." Israel is one of the world's worst human rights violators.

The authors point out that the media has convinced the American public that US and Israeli interests are identical and any opinion to the contrary is unacceptable, outrageous and intolerable. Criticism of the government of Israel has been tacitly but effectively prohibited in the U.S. However, the media in Israel has been more forthcoming.

Interestingly, the authors point out that many in Israel oppose the brutal treatment of the Palestinians, and in fact oppose US support in defense of Israel's actions. In fact, Israeli newspapers often publish articles about the brutal treatment of the Palestinians. More articles in favor of the Palestinians and against the brutality of the Israeli army are published in Israel than in the US.

Israel is the strongest nation in the Middle East, and one of the strongest nations in the world. It also is a nuclear nation. No country in the Middle East can win a fight against Israel, even if they all joined force together. With its nuclear arsenal, no country could possibly envision conquering it, let alone erase it from the pages of history, as the Iranian president has often foolishly said. Israel is safe, and can take care of itself, and does not need US support.

According to the authors, the Iranians have been pushed to obtain nuclear weapons. What if Canada is suddenly conquered by China or Russia? Wouldn't the US try to undermine the new Russian or Chinese friendly government? The US invaded two countries neighbors to Iran--Afghanistan and Iraq. It also has bases in neighboring Arab countries, such as Qatar, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. It also placed Iran as a terrorist and rogue state, and threatens to hit it. Under such circumstances, isn't it normal for Iran to try to militarize itself? Wouldn't the US have done the same if it was under a similar situation?

According to the authors, it is the Israel lobby that pushed the US to go to war against Iraq, and it is now pushing the US to go to war against Syria and Iran.

Israel does not act in the best interest of the US, yet because US politicians need the Jewish vote to win elections, they blindly support Israel. By supporting Israel, the US is distancing itself from the rest of the world, mainly from Arab countries. Instead of being an asset to the US, Israel has become a liability. After World War II and during the cold war, Israel was an important military base for the US against the USSR. However, with the cold war over, Israel can't be used as a military base for fear of upsetting Arab countries. For this reason, during both US wars against Iraq in 1991 and 2003, Israel was not used by the Allied Forces as a military base. The authors ask, "What strategic importance is Israel now with the cold war over?"

According to the authors, Israel is the number one nation with a spy network within US borders. It is a well known fact that Israel has sold stolen US military technology to China. Israel continues to spy on the US today.

The authors conclude that while the US should insure Israel's existence, it should treat Israel no differently than it treats other allies. In other words, the US should forgo its so-called "special relationship" with the Jewish state.

Words are indeed mightier than the sword.

I agree with one reviewer who asked, "When will there be a Lobby for the American people?"