Former CIA analyst Kathleen Christison on Grit TV with Laura Flanders today. Wow: Flanders is taking on the Israel lobby frontally, featuring American left/realists talking about Obama’s "loyalty" to Israel. Good for her…
Flanders asks, "How did you who worked… deeply in establishment Washington… get curious?" Christison: "I do credit the CIA for exposing me to the actual situation. To get me away from the romantic image of Israel… that never did anything bad to the Palestinians."
Flanders: What about the American interest?
"This is one of the major root causes of terrorism against us…Because Muslim people, Arab people recognize that What we are doing to the Palestinians through Israel, what we are enabling, is a gross gross injustice."
Bill Christison, also former CIA: "The power of Israeli propaganda in this country…of the Israel lobby… gives this fairly small group in the United States gives this small group immense power…"
I listened to about 8 minutes, and I didn’t hear anything new.
What did you find of value in this?
The usual, what all Americans need to know, just as they need to know what their government has done, and is doing behind the scenes on the domestic front. The value is factual empowerment to make informed decisions about what their government is doing and/or enabling in the name of “the American people.”
Our own MSM has become a government propaganda organ on the issues most
key to our nation’s best interests, and those of the world.
The same could be said about all your posts, Richard. To be fair, the same could be said about most posts by anyone on this subject. It’s been a long time since I’ve learned anything really startlingly new on the subject.
I didn’t hear anything new.
Classic dissembling. When confronted with a new disturbing fact the first response is to ignore it. If it persists ridicule it. Then finally after it has been out there for awhile it can then be dismissed as offering nothing new. It is true, that we are now in the nothing new stage. What is effective about these three stages of dissembling, is that the issue never has to be directly addressed.
I would like to see Obama stand firm on the settlements. If he goes down, that could seal the hope of any Mid-East progress for a long, long time.
Barak might have a plan (after consulting with his self-hating Jews). He has succeeded in precarious situations in the past. What that plan is, I have no idea.
Christisons are right on the problem of the settlements. Israel is making the US look like a big bag of wind. This country defies our foreign policy, spits in our face. When our enemies come for us, they will see that we are all talk and can’t even quell a settler colony mutiny.
ugggh…
RE: “I would like to see Obama stand firm on the settlements.”
SEE: “East Jerusalem Shuts Out Thousands of Palestinians on Holy Day”, by Mel Frykberg, 09/01/09
(EXCERPT) …Prof. Moshe Maoz from Jerusalem’s Hebrew University says it is too early to say whether there has been an about-face by the U.S.
“The language is very ambiguous, but it is very worrying at the same time. I hope that Obama is not giving in to Netanyahu. This would be a disaster for all concerned, both Israelis and Palestinians. What is needed now is for the U.S. to increase pressure on Israel, not reduce it,” Maoz told IPS.
“I think it could be a tactical move on the part of the Americans. They are aware that the settlement issue is stalling peace talks. There are rumors that Obama has a settlement plan in the pipeline which could involve final borders between Israel and a future Palestinian state.
“If this is true, then I think the U.S. could come back to the issue of a settlement freeze in East Jerusalem at a later stage. One of Obama’s former Mideast advisers Rashid Khalidi is from East Jerusalem, so I’m sure the president is well aware of the facts on the ground.”…
ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to original.antiwar.com
Thanks for the info. I think it’s difficult to gauge where things stand on settlements, since there are likely many negotiations. But historically the Israeli gov’t always drags their feet with any real peace offering.
Yes, Obama knows for sure about the facts on the ground, and especially that Israel keeps plantilng more “facts” there in the form of settlement expansion, and has since 1967; we couldn’t say that for the former president Bush, except that
whether or not he ever got objective consultation, he didn’t really care about the Palestinians at all.
“P.J. Crowley said that the administration would be showing flexibility on “pre-conditions for all parties involved in Middle East peace negotiations.”
“We put forward our ideas, publicly and privately, about what it will take for negotiations to be restarted, but ultimately it’ll be up to the parties themselves, with our help, to determine whether that threshold has been met,” he said.
Up until this statement the U.S. and the EU have repeated unequivocally that Israel is obliged to cease its settlement expansion and building in East Jerusalem as this prejudices a future settlement on the city and the peace process itself.”
What to make of this, at this juncture? It all depends on
what “with our help” means. The real issue is, will Obama
use sticks as well as carrots on Israel. Sticks have been used on the Pals for decades now by us. It’s the same
question any concerned American has regarding what
Obama will do regarding Iran-Israeli situation.
Looking at how Obama capitulated to Big Banking, and how the democrats capitulated to Big Pharma and Big
Insurance regarding Obamacare, I’m afraid real “change”
is not going to happen. The future does not look bright, either domestically or regarding foreign policy in the Middle East.
I hope I’m wrong.
I see double dip depression here, and WW3 over there–
that will be the de facto “solution.”
Citizen,
It is nearly certain that there will be a subsequent downturn, as foreclosures are increasing, and to date the substantive measures to prop up the economy have been temporary.
The stimulus plan is bailing out states, not putting much funding out for work.
Its unclear to me that he will have any political capital to bring to the Israel/Palestine question in a year.
I think he blew it with how he rolled out health care legislation. I think the solutions proposed are not solutions to any of the criteria he defined as desirable in a package. And, he handled the development of the legislation actually poorly.
I agree with what you say here.
The fact of the matter is that Obama never had a plan to do anything different in the current Israeli occupation, this is the only conclusion because he had no alternative for none compliance. In health care Obama never planned something to win, he wants to appear in both of these instances to having tries to do something which was really doing nothing. Political has never been about getting results but giving appearances.
I prefer calling this “drawing the wrong conclusions” rather than “the fact of the matter”.
Any thoughts about this?
link to state.gov