Who can liberating America from Israel?
But one thing for sure, Donald Trump is not going to be the man. Because not only he is too personally involved with Israel eg. Jared Kushner’s connection to an Israeli business goes without scrutiny … he also seen as taking order directly from Israel with no liberty to refuse. That he is not just a “puppet”, but literally a “peon” of Israel!
Trump’s Little Known 1989 Trip To Israel
Why Is Trump Seen As Totally Under Israel’s Control?
Take Jerusalem embassy move for example. Trump appeared to have announced the relocation under the order of Netanyahu because he appeared unprepared – both sloppy and slurry when the announcement was made. And he said it will take years to plan and execute. However, the next thing we heard is his has changed his mind, he wanted to bring forward the relocation to next year (and the embassy shall be scaled down to a way “smaller” version).
As if this is not obvious enough that the change is not Trump’s idea, Netanyahu just announced on his behalf that the embassy will be opened on Israel’s Independence Day in May this year! And Trump has been summoned to inaugurate the opening ceremony.
Anyway, Trump’s love affairs with Israel has come a long way …
Trump’s Little Known 1989 Trip To Israel
Excerpts from Haaretz’s article, Israel Releases ‘Trump File’: The U.S. President’s Little-known 1989 Visit to the Jewish State by Ofer Aderet.
Among the projects that Trump showed an interest in during his visit was building a casino in Eilat. In the Trump file, one of the documents notes that this was the “practical reason” for Trump’s visit, “since that is Mr. Trump’s field.”
Trump, who was 43 at the time, arrived in Israel on July 29, 1989 on his private jet. An unnamed deputy minister – probably Yossi Beilin, then-Finance Minister Shimon Peres’s deputy – welcomed the tycoon at the airport.
The invitation was signed by Israel’s then-ambassador to the U.S., Moshe Arad, in the name of the prime minister and his substitute.
The hotel made some concessions to its guests, saying that it would only charge Peres the rates for a regular room while giving him a suite. This implies that Trump and Peres slept at the same hotel during the businessman’s visit… More
Another “saucy” event was “How Donald Trump Got Tapped to Lead New York’s Israel Day Parade” – Trump was the grand marshal of the 40th Salute to Israel Parade. He marched alongside his co–grand marshal, sex therapist Dr Ruth in spring 2004, at the height of violence in the Gaza Strip.
How is Liberating America From Israel Possible When The President Of United States Has So Much Personal Interest In Zionist State?
Liberating America From Israel
Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the 9/11 catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
“Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri: Attack America to Liberate Jerusalem
By Paul Findley
The U.S. lobby for Israel is powerful and intimidating, but any determined president could prevail and win overwhelming public support for the suspension of aid by laying these facts before the American people:
Israel’s present government, like its predecessors, is determined to annex the West Bank — biblical Judea and Samaria — so Israel will become Greater Israel. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who maintain a powerful role in Israeli politics, believe the Jewish Messiah will not come until Greater Israel is a reality. Although a minority in Israel, they are committed, aggressive, and influential. Because of deep religious conviction, they are determined to prevent Palestinians from gaining statehood on any part of the West Bank.
In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel uses the pretext of eradicating terrorism, but its forces are actually engaged in advancing the territorial expansion just cited. Under the guise of anti-terrorism, Israeli forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle. With due process nowhere to be found, hundreds are detained for long periods and most are tortured. Some are assassinated. Homes, orchards, and business places are destroyed. Injured or ill Palestinians needing emergency medical care are routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many children are undernourished. Four million Palestinians are held in the West Bank and Gaza, which are like giant internment centers, bordered with a high concrete wall that Israel calls a “separation fence.” None of this could have occurred without U.S. support. Perhaps Israeli officials believe life will become so unbearable that most Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral homes.
Once beloved worldwide, the U.S. government finds itself reviled in most countries because it provides unconditional support of Israeli violations of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the precepts of all major religious faiths.
How did the American people get into this fix?
Nine-eleven had its principal origin years ago when Israel’s U.S. lobby began its unbroken success in stifling debate about the proper U.S. role in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and effectively concealed from public awareness the fact that the U.S. government gives massive uncritical support to Israel.
Thanks to the suffocating influence of Israel’s U.S. lobby, open discussion of the Arab-Israeli conflict has been non-existent in our government all these years. I have firsthand knowledge, because I was a member of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee in June 1967 when Israeli military forces took control of the Golan Heights, a part of Syria, as well as the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza. I continued as a member for 16 years, and since then have maintained a close watch on Congress.
For many years, not a word has been expressed in that committee or in either chamber of Congress that deserves to be called debate on Middle East policy. No restrictive or limiting amendments on aid to Israel have been offered for more than 30 years, and none of the few offered in previous years received more than a handful of votes. On Capitol Hill, criticism of Israel, even in private conversation, is all but forbidden, treated as downright unpatriotic, if not anti-Semitic. The continued absence of free speech was assured when those few who spoke out — Senators Adlai Stevenson and Charles Percy, and Reps. Paul “Pete” McCloskey, Cynthia McKinney, Earl Hilliard, and myself — were defeated at the polls by candidates heavily financed by pro-Israel forces.
As a result, legislation dealing with the Middle East has been heavily biased in favor of Israel and against Palestinians and other Arabs year after year. Home constituencies, misled by news coverage equally lop-sided in Israel’s favor, remain largely unaware that Congress behaves as if it were a subcommittee of the Israeli parliament. This bias is widely noted beyond America, where most news media candidly cover Israel’s conquest and generally excoriate America’s complicity and complacency.
The fury should surprise no one who reads foreign newspapers or listens to BBC. In several televised statements long before 9/11, Osama bin Laden, believed by U.S. authorities to have masterminded 9/11, cited U.S. complicity in Israel’s destruction of Palestinian society as a principal complaint. Prominent foreigners, in and out of government, have expressed their opposition to U.S. policies with steadily growing frequency and severity.
The lobby’s intimidation remains pervasive. It seems to reach every government center, and even houses of worship and revered institutions of higher learning. It is highly effective in silencing the many U.S. Jews who object to the lobby’s tactics and Israel’s brutality.
Nothing can justify 9/11. Those guilty deserve maximum punishment, but it makes sense for America to examine motivations as carefully as possible. Terrorism almost always arises from deeply-felt grievances. If they can be eradicated or eased, terrorist passions are certain to subside.
In the years since 9/11, American presidents have made no attempt to redress grievances. In fact, they have made the scene far worse by supporting Israel’s religious war against Palestinians, an alliance that has intensified anti-American anger. America’s leaders seem oblivious to the fact that nearly two billion people worldwide regard the plight of Palestinians as today’s most important foreign-policy challenge.
No one in authority will admit a calamitous reality that is skillfully shielded from the American people, but which is clearly recognized by most of the world: America suffered 9/11 and its aftermath, and was then at war with Iraq, mainly because U.S. policy in the Middle East is made in Israel, not in Washington.
Israel is a scofflaw nation and should be treated as such. Instead of helping its leaders intensify Palestinian misery, our president should suspend all aid until Israel ends its occupation of Arab land seized in 1967. The suspension would force compliance by Israel’s leaders or lead to their removal from office, as the Israeli electorate will not tolerate a prime minister who is at odds with the White House.
If the American president needs an additional reason for doing the right thing, he can justify the suspension as a matter of military necessity, an essential step in winning international support for his war on terrorism. He can cite a worthy precedent. When President Abraham Lincoln issued the proclamation that freed only the slaves in states that were then in rebellion, he made the restriction because of “military necessity.” If the American president suspends U.S. aid, he will liberate all Americans from long years of bondage to Israel’s misdeeds.
Perhaps American should look at anyone else except to re-elect Trump?
Chris Hedges: “This is not a war. This is Murder.”
Gaza the silence of a Nation
Paul Findley: High Cost of Subservience to Israel
In the greatest service of his long public life, former President Jimmy Carter warns of the grave consequences of America’s phenomenal subservience to Israel. In his latest book and recent lectures, he focuses on how Israel’s cruel occupation, made possible by massive and unconditional U.S. support, has subjected the Palestinian people to terrible suffering for forty long years. Beyond that grave human tragedy, candid observers must cite U.S. complicity in Israeli lawlessness as the major factor that prompted the horror of 9/11 and lured America into launching three costly, wrong-headed, and failing wars, Afghanistan, Iraq and the War on Terror. The linkage is easily identified.
America’s support of Israel’s brutality was the main motivation for 9/11. It was the ultimate expression of Arab fury over America’s double standard that routinely ignores Israeli violations of Arab human rights. Nine-eleven would not have happened if any U.S. president in the last forty years had refused to finance Israel’s humiliation and destruction of Palestine. Michael Scheuer, a former CIA analyst now a consultant to CBS News, recently told a congressional committee that “our unqualified support of Israel” was the main reason for 9/11. Marine General Anthony Zinni, President George W. Bush’s first special envoy to the Middle East, has stated that the United States invaded Iraq for Israel and oil. Osama bin Laden repeatedly said it was payback for U.S. support of Israel’s brutal treatment of Palestinians and other Arabs and for U.S. complicity in 1982 when Israeli forces used U.S.-donated munitions to massacre over 18,000 innocent Arabs in Lebanon.
The U.S. acts of war in Afghanistan and the War on Terror were President Bush’s retaliation for 9/11. Israel – and only Israel – urged the United States to invade Iraq. Israel’s lobby in Washington pushed hard and prevailed. To our foreign critics, these wars focus on killing people outraged by our pro-Israel bias. Our government has done nothing to redress the grievances of Israel’s victims.
Despite this grim record, U.S. subservience to the wishes of Israel’s leaders does not change. Unconditional aid to Israel keeps flowing, as does Israel’s savage treatment of Palestinians and other Arabs. Moreover, the Bush administration is fully and openly pledged to do whatever is necessary – even acts of war- to halt Iran’s nuclear program even if its projects are lawfully limited to peaceful purposes. Israel is the only nation urging the United States to attack Iran. The lobby is pushing hard again. If the U.S. assaults Iran it will be on Israel’s behalf.
Congress, like the rest of America, is totally devoid of debate on the amazing role of this small nation in critical U.S. policy. Members are fulsome in public praise of the Jewish state, but no politician mentions the illegal behavior of Israel or the staggering burden it imposes on our country. How did Israel gain this influence?
It all started 40 years ago. On June 8, 1967, the U.S. commander-in-chief, President Lyndon B. Johnson, turned his back on the crew of a U.S. navy ship, the USS Liberty, despite the fact that the ship was under deadly assault by Israel’s air and sea forces. The Israelis were engaged in an ugly scheme to lure America into their war against Arab states. They tried to destroy the Liberty and its entire crew, then pin the blame on the Arabs. This, they reasoned, would outrage the American people and immediately lead the United States to join Israel’s battle against Arabs.
The scheme almost worked. It failed because, despite the carefully-planned multi-pronged assault, the Liberty crew managed to broadcast an SOS over a makeshift antenna. When the appeal reached U.S. aircraft carriers nearby, the commanders immediately launched fighter planes to defend the ship. Informed of the launch, President Johnson ordered the rescue planes to turn back immediately.
For the first time in history, forces of the U.S. Navy were denied the right to defend a Navy ship under attack. Johnson said, “I don’t care if the ship sinks, I am not going to embarrass an ally.” Those were his exact words, heard by Navy personnel listening to radio relays. The ally Johnson refused to embarrass was Israel. To him, saving Israel from embarrassment was more important than saving the lives of the Liberty crew.
The day yielded infamy, deceit, lies and cover-up at the highest level. When the SOS reached the top military commanders in Israel, they immediately canceled the assault, claiming it was a case of mistaken identity. At the White House, Johnson accepted Israel’s claim, even though he knew it was a lie. Then Johnson magnified the day’s infamy by ordering a cover-up of the truth. Liberty survivors were sworn to secrecy. Even those in hospital beds and badly wounded were threatened with court martial if they told anyone what actually happened. The cover-up has been continued by every administration since Johnson’s.
It proved to be a fateful turning point in Israel’s power over U.S. foreign policy. The Liberty experience convinced Israeli officials that they could get by with literally anything – even the murder of U.S. sailors – in their manipulation of the U.S. government. Financial aid to Israel began to pour like a river, all of it with no stings attached. According to The Christian Science Monitor, this outpouring has now cost U.S. taxpayers over $1.4 trillion. Costs go far beyond money. Thousands of American families are blighted forever, with America’s once high moral standing in shambles. Because of its unqualified support of Israel, Washington is hated worldwide as never before.
The principal source of Israel’s influence is the fear it seems to instill in every sector of our society. The most effective instrument of intimidation employed by its lobby is the reckless accusation of anti-Semitism, often leveled at anyone criticizing any aspect of Israeli behavior. Several organizations, fundamentalist Christian as well as Jewish, lobby for Israel, but the principal one is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). I can personally certify that for many years it has cast a blanket of fear over Capitol Hill and blocked any semblance of unfettered discussion.
I unintentionally contributed to that fear in 1985 when my book, They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, was published. It reports in detail the efficiency of Israel’s U.S. lobby, its history and tactics. Most of the text arose from my personal experience as AIPAC’s prime target during my last five years as a Member of Congress. It also details the lobby’s important role in the defeat of Senators Charles Percy and Adlai Stevenson, and U.S. Rep. Paul “Pete” McCloskey. In a rare burst of public candor about its partisan activities, AIPAC claimed credit for defeating re-election bids by myself in 1982 and Senator Percy in 1984.
My book became a bestseller. I hoped it would inspire public officials and other citizens to revolt against the lobby’s influence on U.S. policy, but several of my former colleagues told me it had the opposite effect. One said, “After what AIPAC did to you and Percy, I vote with the lobby every time.”
Israel’s grip on America seems impervious. Two distinguished political scientists, John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard, strode resolutely into the Middle East minefield a year ago by co-authoring a paper on Israel’s lobby. More recently, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, a book written by former President Carter, revered worldwide for his effective work on international conflict resolution, was published.
These brave statements should have produced a groundswell of public protest demanding America’s liberation from Israel. Although the professors and Carter have pursued the lecture circuit, no tide of outrage has developed. With few exceptions, America’s major editors, producers, commentators, academics and politicians have given these courageous initiatives the silent treatment. Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill simply said, “Carter doesn’t not speak for the Democratic Party.”
Nationwide, the lobby’s influence is pervasive, sustained and deep, a phenomenon unprecedented in U.S. history. Because of that power, the “other” Israel is almost never discussed openly and candidly any place in America, even in private conversation. It is impossible to explain the silence except as a reflection of profound fear.
The situation is highly dangerous. America has already paid a towering price for our subservience to Israel, and great additional burdens seem inevitable. If the United States is involved in acts of war against Iran, anti-American protest will rise to new heights, especially throughout the Islamic world. It will inevitably deepen the widely-held belief among Muslims that America seeks to undermine Islam.
The outlook for reform is grim. Elected officials of both major political parties in Washington seem hopelessly captured by Israel’s agents. So does every serious candidate for the presidency in 2008. A senior U.S. Senator told me recently that Israel cannot expect to experience true security until Palestinians are secure in an independent state of their own, but he spoke off the record and has not made that wise declaration in public.
All U.S. citizens must accept a measure of responsibility for Israel’s grip on America. Those of us who knew what was happening did not protest with sufficient force and clarity. Those who did not know should have taken their responsibility as citizens more seriously. They should have informed themselves.
The scene is likely to improve only if U.S. elected officials are criticized so forthrightly from home that they fear a constituent revolt more than they fear Israel’s lobby. This, of course, will not happen until the countryside benefits from a rigorous and edifying public debate about Israel’s role in our national life.
About the Author
Paul Findley, a U.S. Congressional Representative from Illinois 1961-83, is the author of three books related to the Middle East, including They Dare to Speak Out: People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby (1985) and, most recently, Silent No More: Confronting America’s False Images of Islam. He resides in Jacksonville, Illinois. This essay was issued on Sept. 12, 2002, and slightly revised/updated in March and June 2013.
Institute for Historical Review www.ihr.org