[Imc-uk-features] From Gilad Atzmon on the debate you are having

[Chris]

Hi

First off I'm sorry that I haven't read all the material
that this discussion has referenced... yet...  

I just wanted to address one aspect of this debate --
should all articles that suggest that US forign policy is
strongly influenced or determined by Israel be hidden?

On Sat 03-Nov-2007 at 02:39:52PM +0100, mary rizzo wrote:
> 
> Yossarian is quoting me saying:
> 
> III)  "America is about to lose its sovereignty...After
> so many years of Independence, the United States of
> America is becoming a remote colony of an apparently far
> greater state, the Jewish state."
> 
> Gilad: Indeed, becoming an Israeli mission force
> fighting some idiotic neocon wars against Iraq, Syria
> and Iran serves Israeli interest only.  Unless you,
> Yossarian, can suggest otherwise.

I think otherwise, I think that the primary motivation for
the imperial genocide in the Middle East is the oil [1] in
the face of imminent or already passed [2] Peak Oil.

I think the US / Israel relationship is more analogous to
that of a contractor / sub-contractor, I think that in
many way Israel is still a "remote colony of an apparently
far greater state", but the greater state is the US. Of
course the relationship is complicated, as is the UK / US
one, but at the end of the day, I think the Empire is run
by the US and countries like the UK and Israel are
essentially partners in crime and are not in charge.

Of course the rolling destruction of the Middle East, the
genocide, ethnic cleansing and balkanisation does appear
to be following an old strategy [3] but the fact that it's
implementation is taking so long indicates to me that it's
only being persued to the extent that it coincides with
the interests of the US.

However I'm not convinced that we should automatically
hide articles (from anti-racists on the left) that argue
that "the tail is wagging the dog" as it were, even though
I think they are wrong -- for example should Jean
Bricmont's article [4] which contained the following have
been hidden: 

  Blaming Big Oil for the Iraq war was quite debatable,
  but, in the case of Iran, since the country is about to
  be bombed but not invaded, there is no reason whatsoever
  to think that Big Oil wants the war, as opposed to the
  Zionists. In fact, Big Oil is probably very much opposed
  to the war, but it is as unable to stop it as the rest
  of us.

(On the matter of war with Iran I think the feature
article we published [5] on had a better analysis, though
Jean Bricmont's article does make a lot of valid points.)

I don't know if people remember but we had a similar
debate [6] over an article reviewing a book by James
Petras [7].

This whole issue is going to have to be on the agenda for
the network meeting at the end of the month but I have no
idea how it should be framed or introduced...

Chris


[1] The "Demonization" of Muslims and the Battle for Oil
    Michel Chossudovsky
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/01/359288.html

[2] Oil Production Peaked in 2006
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/10/384260.html

[3] A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties
    Oded Yinon
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/02/361532.html

[4] Why Bush Can Get Away with Attacking Iran
    Jean Bricmont
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/09/380368.html

[5] MI6 Iran Disinfo: The Prelude to War?
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/02/361578.html#What_is_it_really_about    

[6] http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2006-October/thread.html#5428    
    http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2006-November/thread.html#5484

[7] JAMES PETRAS' NEW BOOK - THE POWER OF ISRAEL IN THE
    UNITED STATES
    Stephen Lendman
    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/10/354403.html