THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Wednesday, January 07, 2009


President-elect Barack Obama has said that he will have plenty to say about the Gaza crisis after his inauguration on 20 January. One can only speculate what that may be but, in the light of his serious and, no doubt, sincere concerns for the mounting civilian death toll, particularly as details continue to emerge about the horrendous bombing of a UN school and the resultant deaths of school children, it may well be that his view does not correspond with the views of the current Bush administration. The question now is: Will Israeli planners escalate their war to take on Hezbollah and Iran before President Bush and his hawkish administration leaves office.

Obama’s comments were not a positive sign for the Israeli right-wing Zionists. While it is traditional for a President-elect not to interfere in any way with an outgoing President’s foreign policy until after inauguration, Obama’s limited comments will be seen by hawks as ‘passive’ and, therefore, not conducive in providing confidence for the Israelis to rely on US support if the Israelis continue to prosecute or escalate their aggressive war to include Hezbollah or Iran after Obama’s inauguration.

There are now only 13 days left to the end of the Bush administration but a lot can happen between now and then and, if the course of events so dictate, there may be some circumstance where such events have reached a point of no return and Obama finds himself in a position by the time he does become President of having no alternative but to support Israel in its fight against Hezbollah and, especially, Iran.

Israeli warplanes are again flying over Lebanon amid speculation that the Israeli government is deliberately attempting to provoke Hezbollah into providing Israel with a casus belli for Israel to launch an all-out offensive against Hezbollah in the hope that this, in turn, will escalate to involve Syria and Iran. As has already been noted, Israeli reservists have already been called up and are now in readiness at the Lebanese border.

It’s all a matter of timing for the Israelis.


South Australian readers should know that there will be a protest rally in Adelaide at 1.00pm outside Parliament House in the city this coming Sunday, 11 January, 2009. The protest is being organised by the Australian Friends of Palestine. All concerned people are urged to make their voice heard at this or other rallies being held around the world. Please come along and show your support for the people of the Gaza.


Anonymous said...

George Bush is still President. Obama is not President. I am not surprised that Obama is not saying anything. But, I really hope that Obama can change course somehow, and to have the guts to say what should be said when he is President. Really? I hope so but I don't think it will happen. There are big forces that will stop him.

Anonymous said...

As if president-elect was a gag-order? As a senator, as a member of whatever standing in "the land of the free," in the great, world's best cradle/superhero/enforcer of free-speech democracy - or simply as a plain, ordinary human being with the tiniest skerrick of common decency - one could deplore mass-murdering mostly poor, defenceless (a few with pea rifles and penny rockets) but all locked in with nowhere to go "fish in a barrel." One single effective word from him (like: "Stop!") and the hideously mass-murdering IDF (offensive!) would have to withdraw instantly, and Israel would have to retreat immediately behind whatever border could possibly be accepted as 'legal' - because as far as I can see and as far back as I can look - the 'legality' of Israel is so questionable as to be put in the 'most probably, 99.9% not' basket. Time to get real: if Obama won't say stop, no-one in the world - effectively - can. But if he showed some balls (ordinary decency would do), that would demonstrate some real "change" we could believe in. Without that single, effective word, Obama is showing his hopelessly craven, cower-status before the criminal-supporting J*wish Lobby.

You only have to listen to the Z-propaganda with slightly more that half a brain to see all the Z-neuroses, keywords: "right to exist," Q: Why? Some g*d 'promised' it to them? What BS, at the very least they could try buying the land, instead of stealing it. UN mandate? What a sad joke, the USraelis make a speciality of violating the UN charter and ignoring resolutions. One simply cannot claim a source of legality on the one hand, then go on to violate that very same source of supposed legality on the other. Going back to some g*d, the IDF (offensive!) violates "Thou shalt not kill!" on a massive scale almost day in, day out - for 60+ looong, filthy years. And of course, the only 'real' use for propaganda is to deploy lies. Lies, murder, theft. "Right to defend itself," Q: Why? They have stolen most if not all the land Israel occupies. The one and only right Israel has is to say "Sorry!" and then withdraw.

History/fate/karma gives Obama one chance. He could stop it instantly - or not: his choice, and his epitaph, before he's even inaugurated. People are what they do.

If Realpolitik says Obama, the leader of 300mio 'Merkins must cower before a nation of 5mio J*ws (plus possibly the same again or more supporters and apologists), I say "Democracy? Nooo democracy here, only pathological criminals and craven cowards. Oh, yeah: and filthy, lying mass-murderers."

In a previous comment, I mentioned the USraeli designated 'enemies.' Q: Does anyone notice that most of these so-called enemies own (or owned) some resource coveted by the USraelis? And that after these aggressive, invasive USraeli wars, they (the USraelis) go on to loot those coveted resources? Is this just some awful coincidence, just keeps happening?