On a Rainy Day

[H2O Man]

11. It definitely is hard.

Now, despite the fact that you have long been both a very good friend and high among my favorite forum members, I shall subject you to one of my way-too-long, painfully tedious answers! I apologize in advance! For this is an extremely important discussion …. plus I'm sore from head to foot due to my younger son taking me on a long artifact hunt yesterday, that only ended when the sun was down. Both of my remaining muscles ache, despite my inhaling hashish, so I'll write this in the transition break between house work and going to the garden. (We have to get back to the Garden.)

First, per Palestine. The British concept of creating – or, re-creating – the state of Israel began towards the end of WW1. It is not a post-WW2 concept. When Russia decided to sit on the bench, rather than to continue to be on the English & French team, the head of British intelligence proposed a plan to re-locate the Jewish population in Europe to Palestine. He noted that the USA might do so, too.

At the time there were Jewish, Christian, and Muslim people inhabiting that territory in relative peace. The British plan, involving dividing the Middle East between themselves and France, included capitalizing on the conflicts that would surely take place as a result of misplacing thousands of people. Thus, they hoped for access to the development of Gaza, though I do not think they foresaw Jarad.

Now, they felt entitled to do so, in the exact same manner both countries had exploited Native Americans – because tribal people identified with territory, rather than the nation-state practice of Europe. They were convinced their concepts were superior, thus they justified the violence they would inflict on the tribal people. Today, many of us understand why Native American peoples – especially young men – would seek revenge on white settlers. This made Joseph Brant and Geronimo the first scary Usama bin Ladens.

Now, I support the nation of Israel. I support the right of Jewish people to have a homeland. At the same time, I support the right of Palestinians to their territory. That seems fair to me, and at least a few other people. Neither should attack or try to steal land from the others. To continue being as fair as possible, in my lifetime, I can't recall a single instance of Palestinians stealing land from Israel. But I do recognize that both sides have engaged in horrible violence. Were both sides to listen to me, they'd knock that shit out, and I would gladly re-draw a correct map for both.

Now that I have resolved all those problems – at least in my mind, if not the United Nations – let us turn to AIPAC. As I said to our good friend Martin, one of my favorite human beings is the husband of one of my nieces. He is of a Jewish family that came here from Russia not that long ago. He supports AIPAC. So I recognize that there are many, many good members of AIPAC. But that does not preclude recognizing that not all of those who set policy, invest money in candidates from both parties, and thus have what I think is undue influence in American foreign policy are doing our country any favors.

Now immediately, or so I hope, you are saying, “Wait just a minute, you savage rascal – did you not support the Good Fight in Ireland back when you were younger, so much younger than today? And haven't you made clear, over the years on DU:GD (est) that you were an associate of Yohn Lennon and Joko Ono's connection to the Irish cause?” I did and was. But I'm old now, and recognize that everyone suffers in times of violence. I'd also note that we did not influence US policy, which continued to support the foreign military and para-military violence of the foreigners.

You may also remember my focus on the AIPAC espionage scandal that was first reported by CBS in 2004. At that time, it wasn't viewed as polite to discuss this on DU:GD, but due to my severe intellectual limitations and Irish nature, I tried to. A brief reminder: Lawrence Franklin, an employee of the Defense Department, was giving highly classified documents on US policy with Iran to AIPAC's senior policy director Steven Rosen and senior Iranian analyst Keith Weissman.

We know who AIPAC shared it with. Now, I know that some people think that Mossad and the CIA are now the same thing. I do not – I view them as conjoined triplets with M16 and the CIA. And that is not to say I advocate surgery to separate the three. Indeed, I would favor the good faith release of their combined intelligence documents relating to Jeffrey Epstein, rather than the mere raw intelligence being released. You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

Thus, I am able to recognize the distinction between different levels within AIPAC. But there are some, as we;ve seen in the espionage scandal, that are at least as loyal to Israel as to the USA. That alone is not a problem for me. Espionage is, though. And so does pulling puppet strings in DC, in a manner that has resulted in Netanyahu dictating US “policy” in the military attack on Iran.