Guess it takes an Irishman to get the record straight. Hardly a heritage of
oppression or a tradition of duplicity, those who trace their lineage back from the Emerald Isle, seem to be among the few
who have the courage to speak the unspeakable. So when you hear all the condemnation against Pat Buchanan’s crucial
essay, Whose War? - you know the article has hit a raw nerve, that deserves to be exposed. Buchanan
poses an essential, and long taboo subject, that defines the issue:
“We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek
to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel
to ignite those wars and destroy the Oslo Accords. We charge them with deliberately damaging U.S. relations with every state
in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian people’s right to a homeland of their own. We charge
that they have alienated friends and allies all over the Islamic and Western world through their arrogance, hubris, and bellicosity.”
Is Pat Buchanan correct? Is there a neoconservative clique that seeks to ensnare
our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest? Or are we supposed to just rebuke the mere asking
of the question?
That pompous propagandist, William Bennett, a sacrosanct toady of the first
order would have you believe that Buchanan still has a “consistent problem” when it comes to Jews. Well, this
time the outrage will be the just due of those who possess the unfeigned virtue. Recently on the Fox News,
Hannity and Colmes program; Bennett spews his unchallenged innuendo long practiced by the “usual suspects”. No
attempt is ever made to deal with the realities of the policy and examine the true and fundamental interests of America. No
the czar of outrage is offended by Buchanan, pray tell! It’s time to lay open the utter and dissimulation from such
ordained establishment pundits.
Rarely, a fan of Democrat Rep. James P. Moran, at least his Irish stock allows periodically for a brief interjection
of candor. “If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be
doing this. The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where
this is going and I think they should.''
Short lived, his nerve to stick to the facts rapidly deteriorated into a plea for forgiveness. "I should not have singled out the Jewish community
and regret giving any impression that its members are somehow responsible for the course of action being pursued by the Administration,
or are somehow behind an impending war."
Another classic example that the might of the Zionist Lobby breaks the will
of those who know better . . . The smear of anti-Semitism is a bogus cover, that seeks only to silence stating the undeniable.
Israel First, means America Pays. But do we benefit from such a one sided pretext for the national interest? We reject special
treatment for any group or people as wholly un-American. Each people must be judged individually and every vested interest,
group and community, has a primary duty and allegiance to our own country. Those who claim a dual loyalty, while forging national
policy or advocating foreign benefit at the detriment and cost to America, are not model citizens.
Their is no alliance between Israel and the Untied States, no treaty, and
certainly no reciprocal gain flowing towards America. What exists is a relationship based upon intimidation, contrived guilt,
extortion, double standards and disingenuousness conduct. We get nothing and only risk national suicide. When will staunch
supporters of our country face reality and speak out? Dispensational Christians have been had. Rev. Falwell accepted and flies
in a private jet, a gift from his Zionist benefactors. Not exactly following the Lord, is it?
Buchanan concludes with this indisputable assessment. “U.S.
and Israeli interests are not identical. They often collide, and when they do, U.S. interests must prevail. Moreover, we do
not view the Sharon regime as “America’s best friend.”
So when this view is silenced, distorted or smeared, we all suffer from the
pretense of deceit. Note the lying campaign in action, from the Washington Times: "Where you cross the line, as Moran did, is when you make a blanket
statement ascribing a view or a motivation to an entire group of people. It is not legitimate when you impute hidden motives
to someone or some group, when you don't address their arguments but attack them for who they are."
Sorry, folks, Moran stated only the obvious and did not malign all Jews. The
line that is continually crossed is the one that pursues to exempt Zionism from challenge. Attempts to confuse the public
with inference of an all-inclusive Jewish support for Israel is a focal point in the deception. The best dirty little secret
that needs to remain under wraps, is that many Jews reject Zionism supremacy, while still being faithful to their religion.
Those daring and courageous voices in the wilderness deserve our respect and friendship.
If you think the venom of the NeoCons ‘PC’ purity is race selective,
the case of the former Democrat Rep. Cynthia McKinney is an illustration on point. If we didn’t know the hue of her color, one
might think she had some Irish genes in her. Remember what happened to her for speaking out? Just ask her father, Billy McKinney,
an old political war horse and civil rights activist. “McKinney's pronouncement that "J-E-W-S" had cost Cynthia McKinney
her seat was the latest in a long line of intemperate statements.”
Intemperate statement based upon insensitivity risks moving into hate speech.
So goes the customary Shmear line. Oy veh, how dare someone raise such a charge? No way is it acceptable
to ask if it is true . . .
Yes, it is a time for outrage and it needs to be directed at the proper source.
Offending is appropriate when you are correct and the conditions demand. The NeoCons would have you defend Barabbas
over Barnabas. Our reply is a loud Genug - “never again”. When Rabbi Marvin Hier registers his
objection about the forthcoming Mel Gibson movie about the passion, suffering and death of Jesus, he says: "If the new
film seeks to undo Vatican II ... it would unleash more of the scurrilous charges of deicide directed against the Jewish people,
which took the Catholic Church 20 centuries to finally repudiate". For this particular rabbi, denial of momentous facts is
entirely acceptable, if it conceals the truth of history.
So when you read, as reported in the Sun, that chief NeoCon architect of the
War Party, Richard Perle is suing journalist Seymour Hersh; don’t be deceived. The New Yorker article
implies that Mr. Perle is using his position as a Pentagon adviser to benefit financially from a war to liberate Iraq. Perle’s
effort for relief in a UK court is nothing more than another attempt to silence and conceal the ultimate motives and methods
of the Israel First crowd. The chant from the “Amen Corner”, won’t save us.
Michael Lind writes about this dubious gang in the Buchanan article:
“It is a recent phenomenon, dating back to the late 1970s and 1980s, when many formerly Democratic Jewish intellectuals
joined the broad Reagan coalition. While many of these hawks speak in public about global crusades for democracy, the chief
concern of many such “neo-conservatives” is the power and reputation of Israel.”
When NeoCons design policy, America risks destruction. When factual statements
about this inherent danger is suppressed and a political price is extracted for speaking the truth, we must recognize who
is behind the betrayal. Moran was right, and the proof of that influence is evident in his retraction. Buchanan has presented
an indictment that is unassailable. Where is Joe McCarthy when you need him? The rot is internal and is visible for any person
to see. Let’s hope that there is a little Irish in more Americans, we need it now more than ever.
SARTRE - March 14, 2003