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.

Thursday, May 29, 2014


THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century.

Written after years of extensive research, THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY contains over 550 pages, including more than 1200 footnotes and some 120 pages of bibliography. The book has been meticulously researched with every aspect of the history fully supported with primary evidence, much of it from the neoconservatives themselves.

The book is a must for all those interested in the history of neoconservatism, the recent history of Israel and conflict between the West and Islam in the Middle East during the first ten years of the NEW AMERICAN CENTURY.

Despite being originally written as a successful doctoral thesis, the book avoids academic jargon and uses plain easy to understand language  

It details the rise of neoconservative influence within the US government particularly from the Reagan era through to the presidency of George W. Bush, when neoconservative power reached its zenith. It details the strong connections neoconservatives have with right-wing Israeli Zionism and the way in which neoconservatives were able to manipulate American power to benefit the Greater Israel cause. The book details how various interests including the Military Industrial Complex, the American religious right, US big business and US/Israeli Zionists converged into a coalition under George W. Bush and his administration that set out to determine the future history of the Middle East in such a way as to benefit Israel and the economic interests of the US.

Click here to read the introduction.

Available now from AMAZON KINDLE for US$9.99

Saturday, May 24, 2014


On 15 May 2014, Nakba Day for Palestinians around the world who commemorate the loss of their lands to the Israelis, two Palestinian youths were shot dead in Beitunia, a small town near Ramallah in the West Bank, while demonstrating against Israeli occupation. The killings were captured on CCTV and the footage has gone viral around the world to a point where even the US government are insisting on a full enquiry over the killings by the Israeli government.

What happened is plain to see; two youths were shot by Israeli soldiers who were among a group that were throwing rocks harmlessly toward the Israeli soldiers who were quite obviously too far away to have actually have been hit by the rocks but clearly not so far away enough as to be able to shoot at Palestinian demonstrators.

Now, despite the killings clearly being cold blooded, US neoconservative full-time Commentary magazine propagandists Jonathan Tobin and Evelyn Gordon, are trying to twist it to suggest that the whole incident was set up to deliberately demonise the Israeli defence forces. Tobin says:

…unlike the kangaroo court of international public opinion in which the Israelis already stand convicted, a more sober and less prejudiced probe of what happened may well reveal something very different than the narrative of Israeli brutality and Palestinian victimization. Until we know how much the film produced as evidence was edited and just what the Palestinian demonstrators were doing prior to the shootings, it would be a mistake for anyone, including the Israeli government, to assume that the soldiers were in the wrong.

He goes on to say:

The only point of throwing rocks and bombs at armed soldiers is to get them to fire and thus create an international incident. At best, the two Palestinians were merely the latest example of youths who were needlessly sacrificed in order to generate bad publicity for the Israelis. At worst, the story is yet another fraud.

Tobin can’t imagine that all the teenaged Palestinian lads were doing was throwing stones at the Israelis in some vain and na├»ve attempt to deter them from continuing their presence in the West Bank and to show the Israelis that they won’t be giving up their lands without a fight no matter how fruitless that fight might be. For Tobin and Gordon the incident was deliberately staged by some master manipulator of Palestinian youth who desired their deaths for propaganda purposes. The irony, of course, is that it’s Tobin and Gordon who are using the incident in order to push their own anti-Palestine propaganda.

Saturday, May 10, 2014


Top neocon propagandist Jonathan Tobin, writing online in Commentary today argues that America’s ‘gift’ of the Iron Dome defence system designed to counter rocket attacks from Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and Hezbollah in Lebanon, does not mean that Israel should abstain from attacking Iran if Israel believes Iran is close to a ‘nuclear breakout’. Tobin writes:

It’s not clear what, if anything, Netanyahu will believe Israel is capable of doing in response to a “bad deal” with Iran up to and including a strike on the Islamist regime’s nuclear facilities before it is too late to stop their drive to a bomb. But whatever his decision might be, no one in Washington should labor under the illusion that Israeli acquiescence to an Iran deal can be bought with an anti-missile system even if some cash is thrown in on the side.

Once again Tobin also claims that Iran may be only months or even just weeks away from being able to produce a nuclear weapon – a claim neocons and their so-called expert supporters have been making for years.

Stirring the anti-Iran pot further is Michael Rubin, another regular propagandist writing in Commentary, who today claims that Iran is looking at targeting US satellites with laser weapons. Well, why wouldn’t they if they believe that the US could quite conceivably attack them? It’s not as though the American’s don’t have the same technology. 

Tuesday, May 06, 2014


It has got to the point that the only way the US is likely to go to war against Iran – albeit reluctantly – is if Israel attacks Iran first. Any hope by the Zionists and their supporters of the US making a pre-emptive strike against Iran have long gone.

The Israeli-Palestinian stand-off has reached a stalemate as far as talks are concerned. The Israelis are never going to allow a Palestinian state to exist and the Palestinians are never going to recognise Israel as a Jewish state. It was all very inevitable. As a result, the Palestinians have adopted a new strategy of building an alliance with Hamas and seeking membership of a number of international conventions as a step toward recognition as a nation by the international community. These are moves that tend to marginalise and even delegitimize Israel especially if Israel takes steps to counter these moves. The Palestinians have also adopted a strategy of not resorting to violence to counter Israeli aggression and expansionism into the West Bank. In short, the table seems to have turned against Israel and, as Israel’s aggression against Palestinians has become exposed, so world opinion has swung against the Zionist cause.

Israel has painted itself into a corner. It has tried to provoke war against the Palestinians in the Gaza by randomly shooting unarmed civilians. A few rockets have been fired into Israel in futile retaliation but nowhere near enough to provide Israel with an excuse to launch a full on attack and occupation. In the West Bank the Israelis have threatened more settlement building. But the Palestinians generally have not reacted with the kind of violence the Israelis needed to justify harsher measures. The new strategies are frustrating the Israeli right-wing. As a result the Israelis are once again looking to Iran to provide a casus belli for a war that will provide them with an opportunity to realise the Zionist dream of a Greater Israel.

Elliott Abrams writing, in the neoconservative Weekly Standard magazine, reiterates Israel’s position. He tells how once again Netanyahu threatens action against Iran. Abrams says that, while Netanyahu has made this threat many times before, this time he has support from senior Israeli security chiefs who in the past have been hesitant in attacking Iran.

As the tide turns against Israel, so Netanyahu will become increasingly desperate to do something turn things around. A war against Iran based on what Israel sees as Iran’s intransigence over its so-called ‘nuclear weapons program’ might well become Netanyahu’s final option pinning all his hopes on the US coming to his aid to prevent Iranian retaliation.

It will be a bad move for the Middle East, for the world and not least for Israel.