Obama Lynching Party
By Israel Shamir
The honeymoon President Barack Obama has enjoyed with the
media since his inauguration was abruptly over – after the
Cairo Speech. After his promise of peace with the Islamic world, in no
time this savior of America, the man who said Yes, We Can became
increasingly lonely and besieged by an unlikely coalition of Zionists, the
loony left and right-wing racists.
Barack Obama has
become the bane of Israeli Jews, wrote the Jewish Forward’s
Nathan Jeffai. Only 6% of Jewish Israelis consider his views pro-Israel,
while over 50% see him as pro-Palestinian and about 30% consider him
neutral. This President is lethal for both Israel and the free world,
exclaimed the starry-eyed British Zionist columnist,
Melanie Phillips. Obama, she said, is destroying “the security not just
of Israel but the world through his reckless appeasement of Iran”. He “has
actively undercut the Iranian democrats… Obama has decided America will
‘live with’ a nuclear Iran. Which leaves Israel hung out to dry”.
There are hundreds, nay, thousands of such pieces, relentlessly attacking
the President for trying to stop Israel’s abuse of Palestine. They turn the
man who received some 80% of the Jewish vote into a black monster craving
for Jewish blood.
The Israel Lobby’s hatred of the president became a new
secret taboo never to be spoken of, just silently acknowledged – like the
Israel Lobby’s drive for the Iraq war and for a bombing of Iran. In a short
video shot by
Max Blumenthal, young American Jews on a visit to Israel speak with
fiery hatred about their new president. This video opened a narrow window
into the even more narrow viewpoint of Jewish Obama-haters. In no time, the
window was shut and this evidence destroyed. Click the offered link, if you
wish, you’ll find no video. YouTube removed it “due to terms of use
violation”. (There is an alternative
link, still not discovered by the Search-and-Destroy team of AIPAC). An
important and rather sane American voice, the Huffington Post also
took the video down, claiming it “had no news value”.
Richard Silverstein mused that “for some liberal political
websites posting material that is too embarrassing for Israel is not kosher,
even if it is Israelis or Jews themselves who are doing the embarrassing.”
The neocons attacked Obama because of
his stand on Iran. When the President refused the pressure and did not
try to de-legitimise the Iranian government, Paul Wolfowitz, the man behind
the Iraq War personally
demanded to see more blood.
However, the truly horrific power of the Lobby is in
its ability to mobilize masses of people of ostensibly differing views and
lead them to a single goal. After the Lobby began drawing his blood, certain
left-wing writers and our internet media happily joined the Obama lynching
party.
William Blum is not a neocon like Wolfowitz or
Caroline Glick, he is a strong
critic of the American Empire. Like
more than a few American Jews, Blum
compared Obama with Adolf Hitler. Blum is not that hard on Israel. He
would not compare Zionists with Hitler. “Instead of getting entangled in who
[Israel or the Palestinians] started the current mess”, he
writes, as if it is an obscure point; he stresses that “Israel's
existence is not at stake” and wonders about the legacy of “the idealistic
Zionist pioneers”. But Obama is a Hitler for Blum, because … Hitler also
gave a speech for peace and against war (!?). For
LaRouche, Obama is like Hitler for some other crazy reason. The mad Trot
wing of the Lobby usually has its own, special reasons to be against enemies
of the Jews, but their bottom line is always the same as for the stalwart
Republican women’s group.
Blum typifies the left-wing Obama bashers. They do not
care that Obama has been endorsed by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. They
disregard the voice of
Patrick Seale, the doyen of Middle East journalism, a friend of the
Syrian Assads who was fully satisfied with Obama’s advances. They are surely
more radical.
They complain that Obama did not actually congratulate
Ahmadinejad and did not support him. They complain that he did not undo in a
month everything that was done during last hundred years. They complain that
he did not dismiss everybody who was somebody in Clinton administration.
They complain that the US did not join Iran and North Korea in the Axis of
Evil. They complain that Obama did not put all the Goldman Sachs staff into
a maximum security prison, next to Bernie Madoff.
The Obama lynching party does not even try to be fair:
any story can be provided with a misleading anti-Obama headline. Our friend
Cynthia McKinney, the wonderful ex-Congresswoman and a Green Party
presidential candidate, joined the Free Gaza run trying to break the
Israeli-imposed Gaza siege. This was a noble and daring enterprise, alas,
doomed to fail: as expected, the Israeli state-run pirates seized their ship
in international waters and briefly jailed her before deporting her. The
story was correctly written by the Free Gaza movement, but afterwards, it
was forwarded and placed on our friends’ sites under false and misleading
headline: “Obama State Dept. intervenes to block Free Gaza aid voyage”. (You
can read it
here and
here, among the rest). The headline as it appears was not provided by
Free Gaza. The US State Department actually did NOT intervene. The Left leg
of the Lobby succeeded in smearing Obama – though the State Department is
run by Mme Clinton, and President Obama can’t yet override her and all the
rest. Other unwitting agents of the Lobby re-ran the same story under the
headline “Obama okays Israel's piracy”. Nothing in the
text (by Paul Craig Roberts) implies or justifies the headline.
Obama bashers ask why he did not send the Sixth Fleet to
lift the Gaza siege, and why Navy Seals did not protect Cynthia McKinney,
and they conclude that the president “betrayed” Cynthia and Gaza. Instead,
they could pay attention to the fact that the American mainstream media gave
zero coverage to the Free Gaza plight. The Masters of Discourse, media
lords, the networks are the guilty ones, not the President.
Government is the art of the possible, the art of
compromise. Rulers need consensus, and consensus can’t be built if the media
is hostile. The American mainstream media is Jewish-owned and
Jewish-operated, and it has its own red lines. Rulers who forget this get
impeached or assassinated. When President J F Kennedy tried to stop and undo
the Dimona Project, he was killed, and his position taken by Lyndon B
Johnson, that most devout Zionist who allowed Israelis to build their
nuclear arsenal and to attack the USS Liberty. If Obama were to send the
Fleet, he would be assassinated, and his place would be taken by an
arch-zionist Vice President Joe Biden. What’s worse, the American public
would not understand his steps. A hostile media would not allow him to be
understood.
Obama had built-in limitations: without Biden as the
surety, he would never have been allowed to win. Without Axelrod and Rahm,
he would not be allowed to rule. These limitations are the direct result of
America being formed, educated and guided by its pre-eminently Jewish elites
of the last fifty years. The majority of Americans are pro-Israel and are
pro-Jewish. This can change, but probably not as fast and as drastically as
some would like. This is not only the Congress that is devoted to Jewish
causes: a few generations of Americans have been brought up on Hollywood
brainwashing, Holocaust stories and Israel worship. By speaking against the
settlements, Obama already came very close to the red line no American
leader may cross but at his own peril. He may do more, and he should be
pushed to do more, but it is the Lobby and its media lords who should be
attacked, not the President.
We should be more aware of the distortions created by
Obama’s would-be lynchers. The coup d’etat in Honduras was presented as “Obama’s
First Coup d’Etat” by many sites who swallowed the crypto-Zionist Trot
lie - actually, Obama condemned the coup immediately. Our friend and expert
on Latin America, Maria Poumier, writes in a penetrating
essay Obama did not invade Honduras:
“The putsch in Honduras failed, thanks to Obama. This is
the view of Fidel Castro and of Chavez. The coup was planned by the Zionist
Lobby, by Miami neocons, who want to push the blame on Obama… but Chavez and
Fidel [Mme Poumier has an access to both leaders] greet with enthusiasm the
“chavization of Obama”. A Cuban
analyst interprets the events in Honduras as “a sign of the declining
American Empire’s loss of control”. After the failure to radio-control a
civil war in Iran, partly because of the coolness and unwillingness of
Obama, it is a new rout for the hawks, so let us be happy with our success.”
Maria Poumier admits that “Obama’s freedom of action is
very limited. Neither the CIA nor the Pentagon wants to obey him. Zionists
in the Democrat Party intended to manage him. But they miscalculated. He is
not a raw material for their schemes… Obama may rule as a king by divine
right, being endorsed by the people of the whole world, and he knows it. He
is torn between two possible roles: to be the Chavez or Ahmadinejad of the
north, or to stick to the role that was envisaged by the original scenario,
the role of a modernizing instrument of the malicious empire. A king can be
a good king if the people support him and push him in the right direction.
He can achieve nothing, if the intellectuals succeed in antagonising the
people against him.”
I am worried that the Lobby succeeded in activating so
many forces against Obama. The most outspoken enemies of Jews also got
hitched up to the wagon. Not only they are
infiltrated, they are easy to manipulate. A reference to Rahm Emanuel
would suffice for them to join in the Lobby’s attack on the president. They
spread malicious jokes about Rahm commanding Obama and gleefully number all
the Jews in the Administration. I once witnessed the same modus operandi in
action against Vladimir Putin. The Russian president was ferociously
attacked for exiling and jailing Jewish oligarchs, and at the same time, the
Lobby’s agents spread around pictures of Putin in a kippa and listed the
Jews in his administration. The idea is to undermine the people’s trust in
the President, be it Putin or Obama.
Putin and Obama are due to meet this week. They may
compare notes: how to survive the Lobby’s attack; and Putin, not the most
brilliant of the two, nevertheless may give sound advice. Putin won by
removing the mass media from the oligarchs’ clutches. They lost their TV
stations, and after that they were not dangerous anymore. They still have
their regional newspapers, and they are as hostile to Putin as ever, but
without TV they can’t hypnotise the mass man.
The same advice could be given by Chavez – it is thanks
to his satellite TV network TELESUR, that the putschists in Honduras failed
to get international recognition. Now Chavez intends to take the media away
from the hostile media lords. This should be done in the US, too. A free
media is not necessarily a Jewish-owned one, after all!
“No, I will not take part in the lapidation of Obama”,
concludes Maria Poumier, and I second her decision: I would not take part in
the lynching. I agree with the view of our friend Gilad Atzmon, who
wrote:
“President Obama seems to realise what is going on. He
knows about the humiliation, he knows about the starvation of Gaza. The fact
that he allows himself to juxtapose the Holocaust and Gaza proves that he is
a million years ahead of most Palestinian solidarity campaigners who are
reluctant to engage in this necessary equation just to avoid offending one
Jew or another.
The president has still long way to go. And yet,
President Obama has made a major step in the last few days. He is now
marching America towards humanism. He reclaims the American ideology of
liberty. I salute the man, I salute the great intellect, I salute the
humanist. Gladly I am to admit that God has blessed America. But someone had
better take very good care of the safety of its president. He has some
fierce and relentless enemies out there. And as we know, they do not stop on
red!”
The enemies of Obama are indeed plentiful, from
out-and-out racists who hate to be ruled by a Black, to Zionists who are
afraid Obama will take an independent course, to loony radicals of the left
and of the right. We should stop them, not add to their numbers.