American Intifada or Democratic-Revolution?

By Peter Chamberlin

Morty’sCabin.net 12-31-7

 

Our government’s plans to finish the police state are very similar to those used by the Israeli government in the pre-Intifada days of September 2001, where the making of aggressive preparations to create a defensible position served as the final spark needed to start the uprising which they then planned to repel. In other words, the provocative preparations that have been made in the name of fighting “terror” will, at some critical point, trigger the conflagration. Like the Israelis, the Bush government cannot know beforehand what the “last straw” will be, but it can reasonably assume that there will be some violent reaction to open government preparations for violence, which will serve as legitimate provocation for the total police state transformation of our “democracy.”

According to retired Israeli Brigadier General Zvika Fogel (chief of staff of Southern Command headquarters in February 2000), in “Collision Course,” By Yotam Feldman:

“The constellation of preparations we made actually led to the confrontation – there was no other choice…the conceptual sequence is that we [were] creating the conditions for a confrontation by the very fact of our preparations,”

The Israelis prepared for the event by planning for the day after, much like America’s rulers did in the Patriot Act and the neocon Project for a New American Century plots against freedom. They were plans for a police state, awaiting the “catastrophic event” that would trigger them. These coups were planned to begin the day after the next random terrorist attack set it in motion.

“It is clear to everyone that this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. We want to decide which event would foment the explosion.”

Our government, like the Israelis, intended to be the “explosion,” that would come after a (Palestinian) terrorist lit the fuse. Reflecting dominant Israeli thinking on the starting date of the uprising, Gen. Fogel related the Zionist position, exactly the opposite of the Palestinian testimony:

“In the Gaza Strip, the second Intifada began on September 27, 2000, the day before Ariel Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount. A Fatah man initiated a roadside bomb attack on soldiers who were escorting a convoy of settlers from Karni checkpoint to Netzarim [a settlement].”

In this perfect example of militant Zionist thinking, the plan was to discreetly provoke the violence that would one day justify plans to retaliate with overwhelming force, under the guise of “self-defense.” This aggressive mode of thinking dominates American planners, as well, with this and other faulty Israeli strategies repeated by American forces in the war on terror.

The Israeli plan was to come down with the full weight of the brutal Zionist ideology, to create the”Iron Wall” conditions that were recommended by Israeli hero Ze’ev “Wolf” Jabotinsky (father of Jewish Defense League), intended to paralyze the Palestinians with overwhelming fear for their lives.

Hear is a great video on the Iron Wall doctrine, from IfAmericansKnew.org.

This doctrine, formulated by one of Zionism’s greatest heroes, postulates that peace with the Palestinians will only be possible when they are fully subdued into submission, on Israel’s terms, by a wall of deadly force, against which, resistance is impossible. This is the force of division that drives the building of the “Apartheid Wall” through Palestine. This wall strategy is the essence of American and Israeli strategy in the war on terror ­ build impenetrable walls to divide and fence the people in, then pound them into submission behind them.

http://stopthewall.org/photos/137.shtml

“Settlement can thus develop under the protection of a force that is not dependent on the local population, behind an IRON WALL which they will be powerless to break down. ….a voluntary agreement is just not possible. As long as the Arabs preserve a gleam of hope that they will succeed in getting rid of us, nothing in the world can cause them to relinquish this hope… only then will the moderates offer suggestions for compromise. Then only will they begin bargaining with us on practical matters, such as guarantees against PUSHING THEM OUT, and equality of civil, and national rights.” Ze’ev Jabotinsky http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story640.html

According to Gen. Fogel, “we opened a dialogue of weapons.” (Here is a video of Israelis “dialoging” a bunch of protesters along the “Apartheid Wall” which runs through Bil`in, Israel.) This video tells a portion of this fascist torment first hand, taking the reader where my words cannot go. and also this guy (the father of Daniel Pearl), keep getting free press to proclaim the lie, in places like the Jerusalem Post.

The Zionists are using slur tactics that will ultimately backfire on them, as we are starting to see today. By resorting to the tactic of relying on the charge of “anti-Semitism” as their first line of defense for every incident where someone dares to criticize Israel or the Israel lobby, the Zionists will see it come back to haunt them. By attempting to counter anti-Zionism or anti-Israel statements with the same blanket of protection that is given to the Jewish people, over the charge of anti-Semitism (in the middle of two unpopular wars being waged for Israel), the Zionist lobby will cause unjust persecution for all Jewish Americans. If the American Jewish community fails to separate itself from the Zionist supporters of the war for Israel, then the rapidly building wave of anti-Israel sentiments might easily turn into a true wave of anti-Semitism.

Mearsheimer and Walt have provided the documentation to prove that Israeli Zionists have been the primary drivers for the Iraq war and now the new global war centered on Iran. Abe Foxman and friends have tried to call these patriotic authors anti-Semitic, charging that they are reviving the “old canard,” that accuses the Jews of starting wars. Foxman, it is not a canard if it is true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canards >

Lobby-inspired legislation, like the hate crimes bill and the Homeland Terrorism Act, focus upon conspiracy theories, and the spreading of them. They focus upon critics of Israel, claiming to be fighting the spreading of racial hatred. The bills’ supporters claim that what they do, they do for America. Even though America faces no realistic threat from “homegrown terrorists” and occasional hate crimes are no reason to shred the Constitution. One of the central complaints cited, about the extremist belief systems of conspiracy theorists, relates to alleged Israeli involvement in the 9-11 attacks. This is being played-up as the mother of all hate crimes, in order to silence growing popular outrage over the cover-up and the whitewash of one of the greatest crimes in American history. There is ample evidence of Israeli foreknowledge and perhaps even involvement in the attacks. http://youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw

To remain silent while the proof of state involvement in the attacks is flushed down the memory hole, would be a crime against our forefathers and veterans. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7127

The Zionization of America continues apace. The replication of Israeli police and military tactics is accelerating America’s downfall. The passage of Zionist-inspired (written) laws is making normal political opposition to those policies nearly impossible. Like the Israelis in the days just before the second Intifada, our government has laid the foundations for a domestic war on protesters and resisters. What we do next, as concerned defenders of the homeland, will determine what form the resistance is about to take ­ will we have our own peaceful “orange revolution,” or an American Intifada?

peter.chamberlin@hotmail.com