Signs of a Rift with Israel?
By Jeff Gates
September 14, 2010
If so, that is good news—for the United States.
When Israeli-American writer Jeff Goldberg appears in the news, you know psy-ops are underway. In March 2002, Goldberg published in The New Yorker a lengthy story alleging an alliance between the religious jihadists of Al Qaeda and the secular Baathists of Iraq.
Though a nonsensical premise, his account made such an alliance appear plausible to a public lacking knowledge of the Middle East. Goldberg’s storyline made it easier for Saddam Hussein to be portrayed as an Evil Doer and a threat to the U.S.
Goldberg’s collaborator was James Woolsey, a former Director of the CIA and an avid Zionist. Woolsey assured us that Iraqi intelligence officials met in Prague with Al Qaeda. By association, his stature in intelligence lent credibility to a false storyline also fixed around an Israeli agenda.
Goldberg reemerged to argue Evil Doer status for Iran. Writing in the July 22, 2010 issue of The Atlantic, he argued the Israeli case for bombing Iran and urged that the U.S. again join the fray.
Based on the consistency of his “journalism,” it came as no surprise to see Goldberg reemerge in the lead-up to the ninth anniversary of 911. Aided by an array of false intelligence, that provocation helped persuade the U.S. to invade Iraq to remove Evil Doer Saddam Hussein.
That March 2003 agenda premiered in 1996 in A Clean Break, a strategy paper written for Benjamin Netanyahu by an Israeli-American team headed by Richard Perle. This Jewish-Zionist operative re-emerged in July 2001 to chair the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee where he was joined by Woolsey and others supportive of this agenda.
Advancing the Narrative
Fast-forward to September 2010 and we find Goldberg publishing an interview with Fidel Castro. Emerging fact patterns suggest it came as no surprise to our national security that the theme of this latest well-timed Goldberg article was the Cuban leader’s concern that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is “anti-Semitic.”
Goldberg reports he was “summoned” to Havana by Castro to discuss fears of a global nuclear war. After conceding in the interview that the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis “wasn’t worth it,” Castro turned to a theme of topical importance to Tel Aviv, insisting that the Iranian government must understand that Jews “were expelled from their land, persecuted and mistreated all over the world.”
Knowing Cuba’s pre-revolution alliance with Meyer Lansky and other kingpins in Jewish organized crime, one must wonder if this “journalist” was dispatched to commence negotiations for gambling concessions as a means to fill Castro’s depleted coffers. The recent U.S. relaxation of restrictions on travel to Cuba may signal the pending return to its “glory days” as a nearby haven for organized crime.
Castro’s well-timed comments about persecuted Jews was like a healing balm to nationalist Zionist settlers who have plans to construct another 19,000 home in the West Bank.
So much for those who seek to quell Israel’s long-running land dispute with the Palestinians in order to keep the peace talks on track.
Within two days of the release of the Goldberg interview, vandals in Sacramento, California used a swastika to deface an image of Israeli basketball star Omri Casspi. The identity of the vandals has not been confirmed.
Timing is everything when seeking to sustain a storyline in plain sight.
Here’s where it starts of get interesting as Americans wake up to find themselves unwitting combatants in the first genuine Information Age War. When waging modern-day warfare in the shared field of consciousness, media is routinely deployed to displace facts with false beliefs.
Thus the need sizeable and sustained influence in that domain by those determined to control the political narrative.
Recent developments suggest that the dynamics may be shifting in the “field” where political narratives are advanced and where today’s wars are either won or lost. That field is the shared field of consciousness where consensus beliefs are created and sustained.
In news reported from the Middle East on September 10, Washington took a surprising stance in support of Iranian claims that it was not building a new uranium enrichment facility. That statement came after an Iranian dissident group, in a well-timed release, charged that Iran had a new secret nuclear site 120 kilometers north of Tehran.
That disclaimer preempted a New York Times editorial that appeared in the U.S. later that day—just before the ninth anniversary of 911. That editorial sought to give credence to a report that had already been dismissed as not credible.
Was this an example of U.S. national security attempting to reclaim the narrative? Does this signal a new aggressiveness by the U.S. in waging field-based warfare?
Two days prior, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech stating “there may not be another chance” for Mideast peace. That statement was made the same day that a senior Palestinian negotiator reconfirmed that they would not recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Clinton said nothing.
Could these developments signal a crack in the Zionist agenda that has shaped U.S. foreign policy for more than six decades? Are Zionists losing their chokehold on the White House?
If so, will the Israel lobby again rally Congress to Israel’s defense? Will we see another “unbreakable bond” resolution urging that U.S. interests continue to take second place to Tel Aviv’s agenda for the region?
Timing is Everything
While these events were unfolding, The New York Times continued to stoke the controversy surrounding “International Burn A Koran Day.” The paper conceded that this well-timed controversy began with local coverage by The Gainesville Sun (owned by The New York Times) when pastor Terry Jones posted a sign outside his small church that read “Islam is of the devil.”
By August 26th, The Times was prepared to publish a major piece on Jones and the anti-Islam views of his 50-member congregation. By September 9th, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was prepared to point to Zionists as responsible for the Jones plan to burn a Koran.
In a fortuitous case of timing, recordings played in a federal courtroom on September 8th showed how a government informer induced a 2009 synagogue bomb plot in New York. Recordings made it clear that those on trial as “homegrown terrorists bent on jihad” were not even modestly versed in Islam. To make a plausible case for the later use, the informer prompted comments consistent with the hate-mongering motivation at the heart of the prosecution’s case.
Do these small chinks in the Zionist armor suggest that Israeli dominance of U.S. policy may be drawing to a close?
Next: A look at the recurring use of pliable and reliable assets to advance a narrative.
To Read Part I Click HERE
A Vietnam veteran, Jeff Gates is a widely acclaimed author, attorney, investment banker, educator and consultant to government, corporate and union leaders worldwide. He served for seven years as counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance. He is widely published in the trade, popular and academic press. His latest book is Guilt by Association: How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. His previous books include Democracy at Risk: Rescuing Main Street From Wall Street and The Ownership Solution: Toward a Shared Capitalism for the 21st Century. Topical commentaries appear on the Criminal State website. Jeff is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker.