title: the bnai brith and the history of the mounting assault on academic freedom in canadian universities
text: part  introduction  shares
     
  for the last  years i have witnessed and experienced the severe restraints on any free and balanced discussion of the facts this reluctance to criticize any policies of the israeli government is because of the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the americanisrael political action committee and the absence of any significant contrary voices
   former us president jimmy carter 
  how the interviews came about
  the marxian thesis that the dominant culture and ideology of a society here referred to as social base or just base are those of the dominant class here referred to as system is a sharp tool to probe how political systems work and how they stay in power does this tool work in the us model certainly  the relation between the system and its social base has been regular since the inception of the thirteen colonies because of that sustained regularity system and base acted in convergent patterns of dependency in historical perspective it was not possible for the system to transform those colonies into states and thereafter expand its conquests to form a continental empire without a solid social base that shared its purpose and visions for expansion from that time onward an ideological symbiosis ran between the system and the base not only that but each time the system modifies direction philosophy or ideology the base would adapt by modifying its attitudes and perception
  the patterns of ideological association between the us system and its social base extended into modern times and the yardstick to measure them is the presidential elections if you look at voters turnout since   you will notice that a relativetolarge majority of americans had voted in those elections my interpretation of the vote in relation to marxs thesis is the following voting for a system that is known for its aggressive imperialist policies crimes around the world overthrowing foreign governments not in line with washington and countless military interventions and invasions that left millions of people dead means one thing voting for that system while knowing its attributes policies and actions amounts to active sharing in its ideology culture and violence
  more zionism is racism zionism goes from bad to worse taking judaism with it how modern is israel green party of canada calls to revoke jewish national fund charitable status caveat that does not necessarily mean that all voters share the systems imperialistic values of violence and destruction of foreign peoples the pertinent meaning of voting interpreted in relation to the systems foreign policy objectives versus the objectives of the base resides in two concepts discarding immediately the notion that the base has been cohabitated by the system the first concept has it that the base has given a mandate to the system to carry out its ideology of empire and imperialism based on the undeclared condition to spare the people from the horrors of foreign wars a dichotomy sets in here the system has its way of life and the base has its own the second concept has to do with the basic tenets of colonialism meaning if the system could be successful to obtain unspecified benefits through wars then the base could share in these benefits despite aversion to violence and opposition to the institution of war as a means to resolve problems between nations
   a question would abstaining from voting resolve the issue of active sharing in the policies of the system this subject is open for debate   
  the relation between the american system and its base was uniform up to a certain point in history late s until that point the american state was still busy completing its structural transformation into a big power status that uniformity however managed to keep the patterns of the political power unchanged to be exact despite persistent immigration that should have altered the relations between the base and government as well as the composition of the latter the dominance of the traditional ruling elites was  not open for challenge and  shaped by an exclusive american anglosaxon experience
  but when franklyn d roosevelt showed signs of surrender to the zionist pressure on the issue of establishing a jewish state in palestine he opened a large crack in the system that was the first time in us history where the powerful american imperialist state yielded to a foreign ideology that was not part of its basic project with that a movement with a limited religious social base began penetrating the files and ranks of the us power the rest is history as a result the unrelenting entrenchment inside the political structures of the united states coupled with accumulated changes in the configuration of the us power the dominant american system itself fell under the domination of one of its social factionsamerican jewish zionists
  when franklyn d roosevelt showed signs of surrender to the zionist pressure on the issue of establishing a jewish state in palestine he opened a large crack in the system
  as a group american jewish zionists have all attributes of an independent establishment they possess efficient organizational structures have a monolithic political presence across the american system and they know how to finance their activities with us tax money i must note that their alignment with the global agenda of us imperialism is a twopoint expedient the first is focused on being recognized as earnest operators at the service of americas interests the second is tactical to reap on behalf of israel the benefits of alignment with slogans such as israel is our only trusted ally in the middle east
  the american jewish zionist experience is agenda driven as such their domestic and foreign agendas have precedence over any other jewishrelated consideration
  on the domestic front the focus could not be more evident to consolidate zionism and turn it into a means to  perpetuate israel as an american national issue and  make of them the principal factor in defining american politics you can notice the endeavor clearly during us elections when the zionist media question whether this or that candidate is good for the jews and for israel today voicing dissent against the policies of american jewish zionism or criticizing israel amounts to crime jimmy carter experienced this firsthand when he published his book palestine peace not apartheid  american jewish zionists unleashed the fire of hell upon him
  as for the jewish zionist foreign agenda this is clearcut and leaves no space for misunderstanding it aims to induce control or lead the united states to  adopt hostile policies toward the arab nations because due to their rejection of the zionist state and  undertake military actions against any country that appears as posing a potential or direct threat to israel equally important it demands that the united states keep denying the palestinians rights for nationhood through american diplomacy what is the rationale recognition of the palestinian national rights means the invalidation of the zionist state and its claim on palestine
  because the jewish zionist control of the us system is real and dominant how does the american society figure visàvis this dominance based on observations of the american society and its multiple cultural and ideological patterns there can be but one answer zionism is not the dominant culture and ideology of the american people it is however the dominant culture and ideology of the us political system
  observations
  first despite gargantuan zionist propaganda apparatuses directed to the american people jewish zionists have consistently failed to create interest or sympathy for zionist issues and for israel
  second due to historically developed indifference to foreign issues a majority of americans have only vague ideas on what zionism is
  third to establish roots for their political dominance jewish zionist activists invariably focus not on the american people but on ways to control the american system from inside by controlling first the institutions that matter white house and congress
  fourth this control did not happen because of elections it is preponderantly due to the practice of appointing jewish zionists to important positions inside the administrations
  fifth among the stratagems employed by zionists when they run for elective offices one was particularly effective take advantage of the reverence of the population for the idea of election to do that jewish zionist candidates rarely if ever talk about israel or zionism instead they only debate matters of interest to the voters once elected though promoting israel via american legislations becomes the top hidden agenda
  sixth and to conclude this particular argument the fact that one administration after another succumbed to the diktat of jewish zionists thus indirectly to israel in matters of foreign policy and wars proves that the culture and praxis of those administrations are those of the dominant ideology and culturezionism
  another point to discuss is the expansion of the jewish zionist power by all accounts such an expansion is not a phenomenon but an incremental process in his book the arabists the romance of an american elite  robert d kaplan defined the issue that i framed as a process in terms of gradual replacement of traditional diplomatic elites with new ideological elites that had no interest in the ways of the old school of diplomacy kaplan was unambiguous he called these new elites by their names irishamericans and jewishamericans
  kaplans viewpoint on this replacement is important to our discussion he argued that the old elites approached the usarab relations with an open mind and readiness for dialog all while keeping an eye on the us imperialist interests his argument opens the door for a veritable conclusion the two groups of postwwii american society that kaplan mentioned had in fact changed the dynamics of us foreign policy it is public knowledge that both groups are known for their hostility toward arabs and muslimseach for his own set of religious political and ideological rationales as for the successive shares of africanamericans and hispanics in the making of the national policy of the united states this is another argument
  as a witness to history in early  i began drafting a comprehensive analysis on the role of american jewish zionists in the making of us policies and wars in the arab world in may of that year as my work became broad in scope i decided to seek more views on the subject i came up with the idea to conduct several interviews where i pose the same questions while some of the prospective interviewees declined and others accepted but then withdrew three prominent thinkers acclaimed for their knowledge scholarship and outstanding political activism graciously gave me their views
  they are francis boyle a professor of international law university of illinois college of law james petras a professor emeritus university of binghamton new york canadian writer and former coeditor of the online publication of dissident voice kim petersen professors boyle and petras answered my questions via phone conversations and petersen via email correspondence
  however in the weeks following the interviews my work swelled up to such a length that it became unsuitable for internet publishing in short i was unable to honor my commitment to publish the interviews as planned today as i thank prof francis boyle prof james petras and kim petersen for sharing their invaluable insight i apologize to them for the delay in putting the interviews out there to read
  introduction
  the turning point in the emergence of jewish zionism as a dominant american political force came about when iraq invaded kuwait discussing the origins and strategic complications of that invasion goes beyond the scope of this introduction the jewish zionist establishment seized the occasion mobilized its omnipresent propaganda operatives and led colossal media campaigns to promote military actions against iraq to bring their war mania to fruition they unleashed their experts in all directions they talked about iraqs formidable military capabilities and about saddams onemillionman standing army ready to invade saudi arabia and seize its oil they told stories about saddam husseins personal life his bunkers and his mortal nuclear threats to israel and they talked about iraqs threats to us interests and allies in the middle east    here is a brief account of those events
  on july   iraqi president saddam hussein met with us ambassador to iraq april glaspie it is on record that glaspie gave hussein an unambiguous but indirect greenlight to resolve iraqs problems with kuwait militarily on august  iraq invaded kuwait on august  george h w bush ordered the freezing of iraqi and kuwaiti assets and immediately placed iraq under hermetic embargo considering the prompt extraordinary antiiraq measures that the united states took in the first  hours of that invasion one wonders what was pushing the us to move so quickly on iraq knowing that only two days earlier this was conducting a us proxy against iran the observation that the us did not take similar actions when iraq invaded iran in  or when israel invaded lebanon in  raises many questions what were the us rationales in taking such measures who conceived them did the us entrap iraq why   
  the atmosphere that followed the invasion was surrealistic like a lightning bolt us imperialist and zionist forces instantly mobilized their media talking heads retired generals and bogus experts on the middle east the deafening uproar they made and all lies they told about atrocities committed by iraq in kuwait hid a definite scheme incite for war  in the period august    january   israelis and jewish zionists from all fields appeared en mass and in every possible medium available to urge the bush regime to give up diplomacy in favor of war on january   a member coalition in which the us had the lion shareninetyseven percent of the total forceattacked iraq by every standard and minutia of details the war on iraq in  was an american war 
  at the end of a war that destroyed one of israels arab adversaries george h w bush might have thought of himself as americas laureate hero he did not predict though that his temporary freezing of the us loan guaranties to israel would have unleashed the jewish zionist establishment against him the fact that he lost to bill clinton who opposed bushs freeze and who stated that israel was the only country that paid back its debts indicated that american jewish zionists had finally reached their objective to perfect ways to control the us politics from the inside  in retrospect it can be said that george h w bush was the last nonzionist american president from bill clinton forward us presidents and their vice president became pawns in the jewish zionist play of power
  now as the united states was preparing for war with iraq to liberate kuwait thousands of antiwar activists and intellectuals from a wide spectrum of political convictions spoke loudly against it but no one could have ever beaten patrick j buchanans memorable words about how american jewish zionists and israel were pushing for that war he said there are only two groups that are beating the drums for war in the middle east  the israeli defense ministry and its amen corner   with that buchanan hit the proverbial nail on the head am rosenthal a ringleader of us zionist journalism could not bear what he heard in a rebuttal he unleashed an acerbic attack against buchanan his weapon of argument so to speak was the stale and trite accusation of antisemitism
  whining rosenthal twisted buchanans clear words and went on to imply that buchanan was in effect engaging in an antijewish tirade he reinterpreted buchanans words and cast them in a standard zionistic fashion he wrote that buchanans intention was the jews are trying to drag us into war only jews want war israeli jews want war to save israels hide american jews who talk of military action against iraq want war because it would suit israeli interests they are willing to spill american blood for israeli interests 
  by inserting the word jew in his reply rosenthal and the new york times behind him spat on the face of us political reality under the tight grip of zionism we need not waste our breath on rosenthals petty tactic his clear objective was to distract from the central issue which is buchanans opposition to the planned war against iraq was unrelated to the religious denomination of those who were promoting it rather he was unmistakably referring to their political identity
  still buchanan was honest he pointed the finger to israel and its amen corner because that was the truth the fact that most israelis and amen corners happened to be of jewish faith was nonissue to conclude it is evident that buchanan a dreamer of an american republic not empire could not stand by idle while seeing the united states sheepishly fastened to the yoke of zionism and gutlessly prostrating before a tiny settler state israel
  buchanan did not stop there truthful and resolute he dared to describe in categorical terms the pitiful condition of the us congress visàvis israel and american jewish zionists he dubbed it as an israelioccupied territory  buchanan powerfully hit the target in such a way that countless cowardly american politicians would dare not think let alone say notice that buchanan had placed israel before its us amen corner i view this as a statement he clearly implied that israel is the primary decision maker did that also imply that us zionist groups amen corner are puppets moved by israel most likely if so which has more power in setting the us world agenda and policies israel or american jewish zionists dialectically the answer should be israel by means of its amen corner
  now in december  jim lehrer a former coanchor of the macneillehrer newshour and later sole anchor of the newshour with jim lehrer  interviewed pat buchanan it is important to mention that jim lehrer has monopolized a significant position funded by federal tax money for over  years starting in  is that an issue yes and to debate it the following applies whenever a specific group of people be they christian muslim jewish atheist duopoly party apparatchiks etc keeps an important public post for such a long duration the implication is unescapable the group controls that post because of its embedded importance    but more important they have the power to keep it
  nonetheless when a specific group continues to hold throughout time important positions inside public corporations agencies and branches of the us government a paradigm emerges either the group controls said corporations directlythat is why it is able to do what they want or it controls them indirectly by controlling first who appoints the board of trustees and sets corporate policies and appointees at any rate considering this type of control the assumption that such group has power over the government and its public corporations is reasonable
  additionally the issue of monopoly of news is critical in another respect it means that someone within the context of us imperialism has decided that the us public discourse must conform to predetermined patterns in these patterns issues such as israel zionism palestine us imperialism in the middle east wars etc are designed to move only on linear grounds without ever touching the core of the matter
  before continuing i must state that lehrers political views are not a subject to discuss visàvis his program for one the newshour program is not about the personal views of presentersit is about information prepared for the public from a public corporation second whether lehrer had sympathies for israel or zionism is nonissue because most viewers expect neutral discussions regardless of who delivers them nevertheless a situation such as this has a consequence affecting the special relations between the narrated newscomments the people who deliver them and the people who hear them
  firstly planning news delivery to attain specific results is a good technique for those in the business of indoctrination psychology and perception are the areas of expertise that news planners depend on to disseminate certain news and analyses to be sure these planners know that most viewers have no special or personal stakes on events happening in other countries still the immediate consequence that controlled news and commentaries could generate is easy to predict they also know they can seep to the viewers preconceived ideas through pleasant dialogs affable manners appearance of neutrality and clever circumlocutions
  to be fair to lehrer he was consistent in making intelligent questions however he was also consistent at doing something else he would calibrate his questions in such a way as not to reveal new truths or solicit critical replies that could go beyond boundaries deliberately conceived so as not to be crossed it is pragmatic to say that the observance of these boundaries would nicely serve the zionist and imperialist discourse in essence a practice thusly followed is a preemptive mechanism of control cloaked as a professional presentation
  now in his interview lehrer played dumb when he asked buchanan about his bold characterization of the congress he phrased his question as follows you have also said that congress is an israelioccupied territory now what do you mean by that  italics are mine
  comment semantically as much as politically buchanans figure of speech was terse and unequivocal he plainly meant that the congress observes israels agenda and acts accordingly there was no need for buchanan to say anything further because what he said had and still has basis in verifiable facts with a question such as what do you mean by that lehrer was not seeking a rational reply from buchanan the form and content of the question had the objective of wanting to entrap buchanan make him retract or at least contradict himself to show inconsistency in essence lehrer had simply tried to deny that israel controls the congress through its amen corner because his what do you mean indicated astonishment rather than request for explanation 
  to wrap up the issue without exclusion any denial of the jewish zionist control of the united states is a farce take abraham h foxman of the infamous antidefamation league as an example foxman authored a masterdeceptive propaganda book that he called  the deadliest lies  the israeli lobby and the myth of jewish control italics are mine first foxman lied he knew very well that the jewish zionist control is not a myth but a pervasive reality second but most important the problem is not the abstract jewish control but the specificjewish zionist control this can be explained using a current universal truth hundreds of thousands of jews from all nationalities actively oppose zionism on political religious ethical historical and ideological grounds
  foxmans denial means one of two things either he is a parochial charlatan when the subject is the undisputed power of american jewish zionism or he is very ignorant of the history of zionism  which is impossible either way foxmans business is propaganda demagogy and deception incidentally foxmans denial looks very similar to what some arabs do in the middle east villagersbut even some city folkstry to fend off envy by following an eonold superstition they fix a drawing on a wall in their shops or homes showing the palm of an open hand with an open eye in its center it appears that foxman and his associates have their own superstition by decrying the deadliest lies against american jewish zionists they try to fend off the accusation or the envy that jewsspecifically jewish zionistshave power and influence
  of substance did foxman not learn or did anyone inform him about what john foster dulles told william knowland a prozionist senator from california back in february  in an exchange about the proposed sanctions to get israel out of egyptian territory occupied by israel in the suez war dulles pronounced these prophetic words we cannot have all our policies made in jerusalem     that was in  today all those who deride or deny the charge that israel has a say on us foreign policy and wars in the middle east must prove that those who are making this charge are misinformed or just lying
  interestingly years after buchanan made that statement the successive events proved his sharp assessment and political perspicacity two people vindicated his characterization of capitol hills as an israelioccupied territory and both used his words to make the point the first is a former cia officer philip giraldi and the second is philip weiss founder of mondoweiss website in an article he wrote in  giraldi pointed to the congress as  its still occupied territory  weiss titled a piece he wrote in  as such  capitol hill  still israelioccupied territory 
  at this point do american jewish zionists control the united states do they control it as polity or only the political system do they have real influence in setting us foreign policy and wars against the arab and muslim nations or maybe all this talk is no more than baseless allegations
  next
  part  discussion
  part  interview with francis boyle
  part  interview with james petras
  part  interview with kim petersen
  notes
  jimmy carter speaking frankly about israel and palestine  los angeles times  december  pat buchanan the mclaughlin group aug   quote d in the washington report on middle east affairs what they said israel and its amen corner  february  on my mind forgive them not  the new york times  september  quote d in the washington report on middle east affairs is congress an israelioccupied territory  july  the washington report on middle east affairs what they said israel and its amen corner  feb  david tal editor the  war collusion and rivalry in the middle east frank cass publishers  p 