|I wish I could say “My father taught me never to trust the government.” It would make the perfect opening for this article. Sadly, I grew up in a kibbutz that practiced communal sleeping and didn’t believe in reactionary terms like “family.” In the “Emek”—the “Valley”—at the very center of Israeli establishment, I was forced to reach that conclusion by myself. It was unavoidable, considering that the government had named the 1982 war with the incredible name of “War-Peace-Galilee.” Please allow me to keep the Hebrew possessive form in English. It emphasizes the Orwellian quality of the oxymoron. Yet, there is one exception to the rule. When a government formally denies something, that’s when you can trust that that something was perpetrated by it. Yesterday, April 12, 2012, The New York Times published the denial letter sent to it by Israeli Ambassador to the USA, naming it “U.S.-Israeli Political Ties.” I am sure the ambassador won’t mind my reproducing the enlightening document also here:||
|“In your article about the relationship between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and the Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (“A Friendship Dating to 1976 Resonates in 2012,” front page, April 8), you reported that “on Super Tuesday, Mr. Netanyahu delivered a personal briefing by telephone to Mr. Romney about the situation in Iran.
“In fact, Prime Minister Netanyahu was in Washington for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference and, after meeting with President Obama for more than four hours the previous day, received a call from Mr. Romney. The call lasted a few minutes and covered a range of topics, not just Iran.
“Israeli leaders have a longstanding practice of meeting the candidates from both parties. On July 23, 2008, for example, Senator Obama, then the presumptive Democratic nominee, met in Israel with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as well as the head of the opposition, Mr. Netanyahu.
“Israel does not interfere in internal political affairs of the United States — contrary to the article’s insinuation — and greatly values the wide bipartisan support it enjoys in America.
MICHAEL B. OREN
Ambassador of Israel
Washington, April 9, 2012”
If reading carefully, it is clear that Romney and Netanyahu spoke also about Iran. Yet, that isn’t the point. The ambassador was trying to deny that Israel’s Prime Minister favors a specific USA presidential candidate. That was the subtext in the article by Michael Barbaro published by the same newspaper on April 7, and mentioned by the ambassador.
The long article emphasized the personal links between the two: “But in 1976, the lives of Mitt Romney and Benjamin Netanyahu intersected, briefly but indelibly, in the 16th-floor offices of the Boston Consulting Group, where both had been recruited as corporate advisers. At the most formative time of their careers, they sized each other up during the firm’s weekly brainstorming sessions, absorbing the same profoundly analytical view of the world.
“The relationship between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Romney — nurtured over meals in Boston, New York and Jerusalem, strengthened by a network of mutual friends and heightened by their conservative ideologies — has resulted in an unusually frank exchange of advice and insights on topics like politics, economics and the Middle East.”
Yet, we would be naïve to believe such relation is nurtured exclusively on lavish meals. There are common interests between them, to the extent that there is little doubt Israel will do its best to promote Romney’s candidacy. Barbaro stated:
“The ties between Mr. Romney and Mr. Netanyahu stand out because there is little precedent for two politicians of their stature to have such a history together that predates their entry into government. And that history could well influence decision-making at a time when the United States may face crucial questions about whether to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities or support Israel in such an action.”
“Mr. Romney has suggested that he would not make any significant policy decisions about Israel without consulting Mr. Netanyahu — a level of deference that could raise eyebrows given Mr. Netanyahu’s polarizing reputation, even as it appeals to the neoconservatives and evangelical Christians who are fiercely protective of Israel.”
The Descent into Hell | Tintoretto
Israeli Backdoor to the American Government
In recent years, Israel is notorious in its alliances with American Christian sects, searching for new channels for influencing the American government. On March 18, 2012, in Armageddon’s Alliance, I expanded on the meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, John Hagee and a large group of American Christians United for Israel (CUFI) in Jerusalem. Among the heresies said there, Netanyahu was compared to Moses, King David, and the Messiah. Both sides showed matchless faithfulness to each other, while candidly ignoring God. American Evangelical pastor John Hagee heads the largest pro-Israel lobby group in the United States. Christian Zionism is a Christian sect claiming that the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, is in accordance with Biblical prophecy and a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus. John Hagee is a prominent Christian Zionist, from the sect’s branch claiming that conversion of the Jews is not necessary. Checking his other positions on religious issues discloses him as a Pentecostal at his core, giving strong emphasis to Revelations, a book centered on the Armageddon Battle at the End of Times. Knowing that, his saying that the Holocaust is to be blamed on Jews themselves, and that Hitler’s persecution was a “divine plan” to lead Jews to form the modern state of Israel can be understood. Yet, Christian Zionism claims are clearly not in accordance with the Bible, thus they are a sect.
Then, Mitt Romney himself is member of a sect and from one that is likely to get in troubles with Israel. On February 18, 2012, Annelies Marie (Anne) Frank, a German-born Jew who perished in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, was posthumously baptized by a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the Dominican Republic. This was disclosed by Helen Radkey, a former member of the church, who told the Huffington Post that she discovered Frank’s name on a database open only to Mormons. Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal and his parents were similarly honored. Several Jewish organizations are enraged due to these acts. Mitt Romney belongs to this group, which separated from Christianity in the 19th century. Christian and Mormon baptisms are not mutually recognized, thus there is no other way but referring to them as a sect (see Anne Frank’s Cult Backfires for details on these topics).
Yet, Netanyahu and Romney make good allies on an ad hoc basis; they will be friends while attacking all other common enemies and once alone on the arena, they will beat each other to death.
Exaggeration for the Sake of Rating?
Am I exaggerating the Romney-Netanyahu alliance for the sake of improving my meager rating? After all the fact Romney and Netanyahu are personal friends is not a secret. It doesn’t mean it will significantly influence the relations between the states. Sadly for some, that’s not the case.
Obama is not popular in Israel. Two main issues contribute to that. One is the controversial American attitude towards Israeli nuclear program in recent years. Beyond limitations on workers of Negev Nuclear Research Center in Dimona and the center itself, President Obama has postponed a Middle East conference on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, while Israel was expecting its complete cancellation (see Hiroshima, Tel Aviv: The December 2012 NPT Conference for a review of the issue).
That’s not all. President Obama thwarted Israel’s war on Iran, at least until the presidential elections of November 2012. Israel got in exchange generous funding for its Iron Dome offensive anti-missiles system, but that is not good enough. For the Zionists, “no war” means “no money.” Ehud Barak is unlikely to forgive Obama this brutish intervention on his personal profits (see USA Thwarts Israeli Attack on Iran for more details).
This attitude is clear; Obama was never portrayed favorably on the state-backed Hebrew media. The Israeli administration wants the USA to change its positions on at least two key issues regarding Israel’s nuclear program. On the other hand, Romney is a personal friend of Israel’s Prime Minister, and has already promised “he would not make any significant policy decisions about Israel without consulting Mr. Netanyahu.” Game is over. Israel supports Romney.
Is that enough to end Obama’s political career? Is the Israeli lobby in America strong enough to push aside a president and replace him with somebody more favorable—at least on the short term—to the Zionists?