Fatal Betrayal

Benjamin Netinyahu is urging an Iranian attack on Israel. He is begging for it.

He has recently made statements that are parroted and backed up throughout mainstream media that state, clearly, Iran should be attacked. A pre-emptive attack will safeguard Israelis against an Iranian attack against them. Iran is, according to Netinyahu, a threat to Israel and he makes it clear, with no ambiguity whatsoever, that Israel is a threat to Iran. It follows then, that he would have no ethical objection to an Iranian attack on Israel.

It is quite possible that Benjamin Netinyahu presents more serious threat to Israel than he does to Iran.

International Law

Pre emptive war or, preventative war, is clearly against International Law. Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter prohibits all members from using or threatening to use pre-emptive war: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

Further to this, Article 51 states that self defense is acceptable only if an armed attack has occurred. These principles are vitally important if we intend a future without capricious barbarism.

Detractors will argue that the United States and Israel are modern democracies and rightfully have a role to police the region and the world; most especially the backward and barbaric Middle East. These notions ignore historical and contemporary reality. The Middle East was civilized and at relative peace long before the European tribes got there. And the killing and the oppression that are current in the Middle East is the handiwork of Occidental Empires.

Certainly, the United States and Israel should not be given benefit of doubt considering the death, oppression, and suffering that is occurring and has occurred throughout the Islamic world at their hands.

Dangerous Precedents

Aside from International Law and aside from moral and ethical considerations civilized nations should hold to, there is the equally compelling strategic weakness underlying this whole affair from the point of view of the average Israeli citizen. Their Prime Minister is not only proclaiming to the world that Israel can and should use pre-emptive force against any nation that Israel feels a threat from, he is also telling the whole world that doing so against Israel is fair game. This is clearly implied when he issues threats against Iran. In other words, he is telling Iran you'd better build nuclear arms and you better do it quick because we are going to attack you; it's just a matter of time. He is also suggesting to other nations, including nuclear armed Pakistan, that attacking Israel is not only a good idea, it's a matter of survival and it's perfectly acceptable.

No serious analyst considers Iran a threat to Israel. Hawkish speech spews from the mouths of simple shills and war mongers, or from consequential players with serious intent. Iran is not realistically in a position to build nuclear weapons and if had them it could never use them against Israel. One reason is that it would be suicide. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) during the cold war it worked between the USA and the USSR for a reason.

The right wing in Israel tell the world that Israel feels threatened over some ambiguous comments made by Ahmadinejad in an interview; comments that were actually not a threat to the nation of Israel. They believe they can justify waging war because possibly, maybe, someday, Iran might have nuclear weapons and if they do, possibly, maybe, someday, they could attack Israel. Think of how threatened Iranians feel at the moment when month after month, week after week, and day after day both Israel and Western powers issue both implicit and explicit threats against them.

The Real Threat

The upshot is - it is a lie. Iran presents no threat to Israel. Israel and/or Washington are intent on waging war against Iran and we are not being told the real reasons for it. We were not told why Iraq and Afghanistan were attacked. As Buffalo Springfield warned in the 60s; 'There's something's happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear'.
Currently, in the midst of Obama and Netinyahu playing an ominous 'good cop bad cop' routine against Iran, the Israelis are actively planning for war. They are getting absolutely manic about it:

"Israel is to test an advanced anti-ballistic missile system in the coming weeks, inevitably fuelling speculation about preparations for a possible military confrontation with Iran.

The announcement that the first test of the Arrow 3 interceptor system would be performed "in the near future" was made as the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, flew to the US ahead of a crucial meeting with President Barack Obama at which Iran will top the agenda. Netanyahu is expected to press for a clear US commitment to military action if diplomacy and sanctions fail."

In the face of the lies and the wars that follow the lies, we really need to analyze what has occurred and what is occurring. We need to look for patterns. Something's happening beneath the surface. The real intent may be discovered if we examine action and not words, if we examine outcomes instead of the official rationale.

Ominous Patterns

It may be that the United States had no intention of destroying the Taliban or Al Qeada. If we look at outcomes, we may conclude; on the contrary. The pattern suggests that the Americans aim to empower the clerics throughout the Middle East and to destroy the more secular and rationally based governments. Rational based, quasi democratic, and secular lite governments are being toppled in rapid secession. Even America's close ally and friend, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, has fallen to be replaced with what will probably be a more cleric based government. While this may not have been engineered by Washington, it may play into their hands if they are pushing secular governments out in favour of theocracies.

Syrian rebels are positioned to oust Bashar Al Assad of Syria; another more or less secular leader with a measure of control of the nation that may be unacceptable to Washington. It is worth noting that Assad, a Bathist (as was Saddam Hussein) has been somewhat resistant to American style economic liberalization.

To suggest the United States simply reacts like the hapless buffoons they appear to be would be to make an enormous error in judgment. They certainly have a game plan. Naturally, it isn't shared with the public. We can almost predict the aims of Washington by watching Anderson Cooper on CNN. Whenever his handlers tell him to put forth a full righteous sneer at a particular leader or government, you can almost be sure that leader will soon be dead. He sneered at Gaddafi and various others. It appears to be a death sneer. And now he is sneering at Assad.

There is speculation that the Americans are supporting the uprising and may be behind the uprising in Syria. It's hard to say. What is easy to say is that it fits into a larger pattern.

Within that pattern, the Taliban are stronger than ever. Al Qeada, an element foreign to Iraq and an element that Saddam Hussein would have summarily executed with brutal force, is now operating in Iraq on a large scale. They will soon gather strength in Syria. That is, if this pattern has merit.

Washington's reasons for courting and facilitating emerging regressive Islamic dictatorships over secularists is unclear. It is likely the same reasoning that places politicians in Washington and London in lock step with the vicious established religious dictators of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and so on.

If the pattern continues, all hints of rational based and possibly progressive elements to governments in the Middle East will be wiped out in favour of a return to regressive and absolute feudal rule. The destabilization of Iran through internal dissent, a government that is both ruled through democratic elections as well as the Leader of the Revolution, or, Supreme Leader, may be seen as futile. Assassination may also be futile and pointless. Destabilization through war (for whatever reason) may get them to their objectives. America had a measure of control of Iran under the CIA installation of the Shah that was comfortable for them. The combination of a cleric and a democratically elected government may be impossible for them to control.

Although it is difficult to imagine what the end game may be, if these observations of patterns have any merit, it would also suggest that promoting tremendous instability into the region is another desired outcome. An era of destabilization rife with terrorism and competing religious factions waging civil war against each other may be in the cards. An environment like that would ostensibly require strict control and those controllers (dictators) may be the optimal choice for Washington.

Where Does Israel Fit?

Israel is standing in quicksand if this pattern is what it appears to be.
As it is, the demise of Mubarak, the destabilization of Syria, the ongoing abuse of Palestinians and so on do nothing to secure the safety of the Israeli people. As is often the case, what is promoted as security is anything but. The ongoing destabilization of the region and the empowerment of clerics is doing nothing to help long term Israeli security. Attacking Iran may push their situation over a tipping point.

If the people of Israel think that Washington is loyal to anything or anybody, they need to really examine history. They need to examine what happened to various puppet/minions, from every corner of the globe when they are no longer useful to the designs of Empire. Loyal - they are not. Ruthless - they are. When your enemies are more useful to them than you are, you are finished.

The right wing in Israel has been shocked by what they see as America's betrayal of Mubarak. They shouldn't be. America bears no loyalty, not even to its own working classes. The state made no apologies when it facilitated the export of millions of American jobs offshore for profit. They are beholden only to those that have bought and paid for the President and Congress. And when you, dear Israeli citizen, are no longer useful, you too will be shocked. Between now and then, reach out to your Palestinian brothers and sisters, to your Iranian and Arab comrades. They need you and the day is coming when you will need them. Say 'no' to war against Iran.

Eventually, we may see an aging, sneering, Anderson Cooper outraged at Israel's considerable crimes against humanity. Don't give him anything to sneer at.

The People vs. The United Nations

The United Nations is empowered, under Article 1 of its Charter, to: "maintain international peace and security", to "develop friendly relations among nations", "to achieve international co-operation", and "to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends."

Article 2 states that its members, "shall act in accordance with the following principles":

-The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members.

-All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

-All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

-All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

The United States of America assumes the role of international arbiter and the role of policing the planet. A role rightfully granted to the United Nations. It is widely and implicitly assumed the USA carries this burden and this assumption is rarely challenged.

The World Court was established by the UN as the body to enforce international law, to ensure that no nation or leader(s) can infringe upon the sovereignty of others. It was established after World War 2 to ensure no nation or body of nations can violate elemental principles of statehood and human rights. Germany did aim to take over control of the world through terror and their own brand of exceptionalism.

The UN and the World Court operate to ensure that basic rational principles governing relations between nations are not violated. The UN is careful to ensure the it does not infringe upon the sovereignty of nations and at the same time, ensure that human beings are protected, however minimally, against war crimes and belligerent states aimed at controlling others.

The United Nations did rule against the United States in 1986 during its war against the government and people of Nicaragua. The American war was in response to the FSLN ouster of dictator Anistosia Samoza in 1979. The World Court ruled that the United States violated International Law. The United States refused to recognize the World Court ruling and broke with UN regulations. From that point on, the United States adopted a policy where it will only accept the Court's jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis or, in less diplomatic language, according to their own interests and whims.

Before and increasingly since that ruling, the United States has violated and continues to violate International Law and generally accepted norms in favour of what it terms its national security or, national interests. It operates arbitrarily and is often outrageously belligerent and aggressive to the enemy du jour.

The time has come for the United Nations to stand up to the United States of America. It is a nation that, similarly to Germany in the last century, aims to take the role of overseer of all nations.

Rogue State Extraordinaire


The USA appears to be under the control of madmen. Barack Obama speaks and appears to be reasonable and even progressive. But his actions indicate that he may be quite mad and or/dull. It appears that he is neither. It appears he is under the control of very wealthy and powerful banks and corporations. His role as President has turned this apparently sensitive and intelligent man into a war criminal. Although he is well educated in Constitutional Law and was a Senior Lecturer on the subject at the University of Chicago Law School, as President, he signed away fundamental Constitutional and habeas corpus rights in favour of political expediency.

Something's amiss.

The problem is not madmen or criminals per se. It is much worse than that. It is systemic. It is a virus. A virus spreading throughout systems the world over. A virus programmed to turn hosts toward funnelling money to finance capitalists. A virus programmed to rule nations, and the world, through violence and fear.

It manifests most noticeably vigorously through the American state. It demands the state assume control of every corner of the world, as if it’s the American state's inalieable right. It renders the UN a servile body existing only to serve its national interests.

If we were to concede that view, that the United States has the moral high ground to police the world, we could take the notion seriously. For instance, if the USA did promote human rights (as it claims), if their interventions were not based in psychopathic designs, and if there was consensus the USA assume the role of the UN as arbiter of international conflicts, doing so would give one nation control of people that have had no choice in its leaders or decisions. Doing so would be patently undemocratic.

Mission Accomplished

No reasonable person could make such arguments. American 'missions' are being carried out all over the world. One such mission has left Iraq critically unstable. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was a paradise compared to the current mess left behind by the Americans. Carnage and volatility continue in Afghanistan. Drone slaughters in Pakistan are starting up again after a brief hiatus. In short, everything the Empire touches turns to hell on earth. As bystanders, we get the impression this nation, the most heavily armed nation on the planet, should not be trusted to run with scissors.

Their pathetic accomplices like Canada, France, the United Kingdom etc. are no better. After NATO’s intervention, Libya is strained, unstable, and civil war is likely. Gaddafi loyalists and the Libyan people will not turn a blind eye to the loss of the most generous social programs and standard of living in Africa. A standard of living that easily surpassed anything millions of disenfranchised Americans or Canadians could dream of.

NATO, this 'axis of evil', is splattering blood all over the Muslim world and there isn’t much to suggest it’s going to stop.

Criminal Stupidity


Presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are trying to out-do each other in their hawkish posturing. To the shock of anybody listening, they have uttered threats on Cuba and specifically, Castro, who has retired from politics. This doesn’t matter. The American narrative in no more sophisticated than a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Castro is ‘a bad guy’ and as such, is in real mortal danger. If Obama manages to ‘take him out’, it will play large to the mentally dull and extremely violent American audiences they aim to please.

Western nations (includes Israel/ not Venezuela or Cuba in this cartoon) are apparently okay with anything and everything that oozes out of the American insane asylum. Money and power rule, reason and diplomacy are not taken seriously. And now, at Israel's pleasure, Iran appears to be on deck. There promises to be plenty of war and excitement. And once again, politicians mouth dim rationalizations; Iran may produce weapons of mass destruction, they violate human rights, they support terrorism and so on. And in the meantime, the USA and its quisling lapdogs are more guilty of what they accuse ‘the bad guys’ (Iran) of possibly doing sometime in the future - maybe. The 'good guys' in this cartoon terrorize like nobody else. They actually drop bombs on populations, they spit on habeas corpus, they have the most and the largest weapons of mass destruction. And they use them!

The absurdity of all this is whispered behind closed doors. Politicians in Latin America, in Asia, in Russia, in the Middle East and in Africa cautiously discuss the alarming nature of this madness. They are at a loss of possible ways to respond. Obviously, they don't want to be labelled 'a bad guy'. The consequences are dire. Over the past few years, America’s enemies; Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Mohammar Gaddafi, Anwar al-Awlaki and his son and many others that are not so famous have been murdered by the President of the United States or proxies.

The man America and the world believed would be sane and reasonable, Barack Obama, has just delivered a State of the Union speech where he bragged about the bravery of the American military as they successfully carried out the murder of a sick old man in Pakistan. This was quickly followed up with GOP politicians trying to out-do each other, playing to Florida voters, promising to kill another old man. America has gone completely insane. It is a nation out of control.

The genesis of the United Nations was in response to a world hurting after Germany had gone completely mad. The UN was created to respond to this kind of developing climate. The uncomfortable and possibly dangerous task of standing up to these bullies must be done. The same weather patterns are become clear with each passing month. It is time to stop being polite and diplomatic to a nation that is anything but diplomatic and polite. It is time to make the madmen uncomfortable. The people of Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela are under imminent threat. In reality, the people of all nations, including the United States and Israel, are under the very same threat.

Supporting the UN


To restore sanity and to end the arbitrary and dangerous power held by rogue states (such as the current configuration in the United States) we must make our voices heard through protests and through activism. We must work in concert with the voices of reason at the UN. And they must work with us. The United Nations is far from homogeneous. There are voices for peace, reason, and rule of law that are being drowned out by the psychopath element. Their efforts are stonewalled. We must help them through increasing the level of discomfort for those that aim to wage war.

At this point the people of Iran are in grave danger. We, the people of the United States, Israel, Canada, the UK - and all nations, must stand up and demand that we will not accept war on Iran. We must empowered the voices of reason at the UN to enforce its Charter and demand that this drive to endless war be stopped. We need to develop connections in solidarity with each other and with politicians we may disagree with on many issues but remain committed to rule of law and reason. We may disagree with Ron Paul on the right and President Chavez on the left, but as long as they are committed to rule of law and reason, they are allies. Like them or hate them, they stand on principles and against the madness and irrationality of war and Empire.

Should the UN cower to the designs of the madmen of corporate America and nationalist Israel and sanction war against the people of Iran; if it allows the United States to continue to police the world in 'its' own interests, and if it continues to turn a blind eye to the excessive human rights abuses carried out against men, woman, and children; most notably, the dropping of bombs on them, we must then ask ourselves - and the UN must ask itself, what is the point of existing at all?