Occupy Wall Street Should Oust Facilitators, Mobilize to Stop Obama’s Attack on Iran

The United States is faced with anti-war protesters who also condemn the assassinations of Iran’s high profile nuclear scientists.

An analyst believes that warmongering groups in Wall Street provoke wars in the Persian Gulf region in order to prevent the collapse of the US currency, the dollar.

Webster Tarpley, author, journalist and lecturer joins Press TV to share his thoughts on the issue.

Following is an approximate transcript of the interview. 

Press TV: Let us look at the demonstrations that were held on Saturday. On Saturday there were demonstrations throughout the United States and some other countries including Canada and basically talking about stopping the war in Iran, no war on Iran.

First of all does it make a difference to have these types of demonstrations when we look at back to the prelude of the last war on Iraq, the US war on Iraq?

We know there were a lot of anti war demonstrations being held, in trying to demand Washington not to go in to Iraq, but it did not change anything. Does it make a difference?

Tarpley: It might make a difference this time, because Bush-Cheney were relatively impervious to that kind of demonstration, even though they were not very large.

Obama needs left cover; he needs it like he needs air to breath and if he is getting an attack on his left flag from an anti war movement coming back after a long period when it did collapsed; that is a significant political problem for Obama.

I would not want to overestimate the effect, but I think it is important. We have to remember that in 2006 – 2007, there was essentially a movement, an anti-war movement that was also an impeach Bush-Cheney movement. There was also a 9/11 Truth movement and what Obama was able to do was to wreck all of those.

He essentially neutralized everything. So that when we had the attack on Libya this past summer, spring- summer; the resistance was basically nothing. In other words the protest movement was practically non-existent.

So anything that would get the anti-war movement back in the streets would be important.
We have to remember how this control is exercised. A lot of the anti-war groups are foundation-funded and the foundations were willing to fund them when it was Bush-Cheney, but now that it is Obama they are not because Obama comes from this world of the foundations, in particular I would say the sort of Soros Group foundation. So if this movement could be brought back, that would be a good thing.

Press TV: Ok, what about that Webster Tarpley, what our guest has said that he doesn’t think that really they can make a difference – those people who are out in the street and that with all the wars that the US has been in, basically the American people have gotten nothing from it.

Of course, some would argue that, that one percent though have gone even more wealthy. So, can they make a difference being on the streets?

Tarpley: Well, as one of other speakers suggested let’s take an international approach because it is not just whatever protest can be mounted in the US.

I have a point of difference. We need to distinguish the authentic anti-war movement from color revolutions or CIA-people-power cause that are being attempted to destabilize a government, say like Russia. The so-called white revolution in Moscow in my view is a CIA – NATO project to try to overthrow Putin and what would that mean?

Let us look at what we just had yesterday; we had a resolution brought into the UN Security Council that would have been the first giant step towards a war involving Syria, which would target Iran and the other forces that are allied with Iran and Syria around the Middle East.

If we did not have Putin, if we were back to Medvedev, Medvedev would have let that go through as he did the Libyan resolution. So I think we have to be a little bit more sophisticated and cagy in the international analysis, but I think it is perfectly possible.

The other thing is, this occupy did not start in Wall Street. It started in a place called Madison, Wisconsin and it started almost a year ago now with the reactionary governor of the state trying to bust all the unions.

The way you get real results is if you bring the organized labor forces; working class workers together with the anti war people, so you better have some hard hitting demands, you better have a Wall Street sales tax, student loan amnesty, a stop to all foreclosures and your anti war demands and you better not let some facilitator tie you up in a consensus straitjacket so that you do not get any demand.

Press TV: Are you saying that they can make a difference?

Tarpley: Sure they can, sure, and I think defeatism is you know, you can have the pessimism of the intelligence, but you better have the optimism of the will. Things are pretty bad, everybody knows that, but it’s time to get active, right? The old saying get active or get radioactive probably applies.

Press TV: Webster your final thoughts? Will they attack Iran or not in your perspective?

Tarpley: I think there is a real danger. I think that has to be taken very seriously. The US ruling elite is in a kind of collective war psychosis at this point . If you saw Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice essentially hissing and apoplectic with anger after the Russians and the Chinese vetoed that Syrian resolution yesterday, I think you can get a sense of the mental instability of these people.

One of the things that is driving them is the potential collapse of the US dollar and I think this maybe looks a little bit different than what was just said. There is a group in Wall Street that says, “ Start a war in the [Persian] Gulf; Close [Strait of] Hormuz or get Iran or somebody else to do it; make the tanker traffic impossible; get the price of oil up to five hundred or a thousand dollars a barrel because that is a way to save the Dollar.”

If the dollar is collapsing, you can generate a huge artificial demand with a war.

Sheikh Raed Salah: The "Jewish state" and us

A study published in "The Jewish state and the Palestinians inside" - the Centre for Contemporary Studies

Israel was founded as a political entity on the basis of Zionism; it was not originally predicated upon the principle of a Jewish state according to the religious understanding of the concept. On the contrary, it is a product of colonial forces and Zionist backers with financial muscle.

Many of the founders, theorists and supporters of the Zionist project were atheists with a secular outlook; they tended to stress how remote Zionism is from religion in order to manufacture a degree of legitimacy. This was particularly the case in Europe where many priests and rabbis gave the Zionist project their backing in order to attract Jewry in the European Diaspora.
It was clear that the Zionist establishment sought a specific type of Jew to fulfil the aims of this project, those who would be able to create a secure political entity. This can be inferred from a letter by Golda Meir in 1958 when, as Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, she wrote to Israel's ambassador to Poland: "We cannot continue to take in the ill and the disabled." This discussion obviously referred to Jewish migrants to Israel; as such, this letter reveals the real thinking behind Israel's preference despite claiming that it is a state for all Jewish people. This scenario was repeated with the Jews of Yemen whose testimonies remain concealed to this day.

There are those who do not recognise the ethnic basis for a Jewish people. A lecturer at the University of Tel Aviv, Professor Shlomo Sand wrote "The invention of the Jewish people"; it is considered to be one of the most important books dealing with this subject. Sand holds that "the Jewish people are a retroactively created fiction and a myth promoted by the state of Israel." He also asserts that "the state of Israel was born through an act of violence against the indigenous citizens in 1948." In "The Myths of Zionism", John Rose writes, "Zionism is the problem which threatens peace in the Middle East. No, rather it threatens the future of Judaism with demise. The basic condition for the return of peace is possibly in its elimination."

This begs us to ask what pushes the Zionist establishment to beat its drums day and night in order to remind us of the Jewish nature of the state and demand that everyone recognises its Jewishness. In discussing this issue, we should take into account the following:

1. The failure of this establishment to convince Israelis to stay in Israel. The pervasive corruption within Zionist circles constitutes one of the key reasons for this. The Israeli organisation Sderot for Social Affairs suggests that 67% of Israelis believe that the level of corruption within the country is "high to very high"; only 28% of young Russian immigrants are confident about staying in Israel. The American international lawyer, Franklin Lamb, a CNN report dealing with the reality in Israel which predicted the following:
   
   a.     The migration of millions of Israelis to the United States over the next 15 years.
   b.     The return of 1.5 million Russian Jews to Russia or elsewhere in Europe.
   c.     Half a million Israelis will carry US passports and others will carry European passports.
   d.     According to statements made by a spokeswoman for the Ministry of Immigration and Settlement, Ms Mithal Nawi, the number of immigrants to Israel will equal the number of migrants.
   
2. Yoni Golstein, a Jewish community leader in Canada, revealed that 85% of Jews in Montreal are actually migrants from Israel.
3. Israel's failure to attract new immigrants to the extent that some have called for the dissolution of the Jewish Agency. This rejection has led to demands for the dissolution of the Nateef section. There are also demands from the leadership of the French Jewish      community to abandon the displacement of France's 700,000 Jews. There are similar demands being made by the Jewish leadership in the US where the Jewish population is 6 million. According to Israeli statistics, Israel's population has increased by 125,000 individuals; 21,000 as a result of population growth and only 14,000 as a result of migration.

Israel is, therefore, stripped of its internal sense of invulnerability. According to Police Inspector David Cohen, the spectre of corruption and organised crime constitutes a strategic threat to Israel. Avi Zamir, the head of Israeli army recruitment, has revealed that the number of men dodging compulsory military service rose from 18.1% in 1991 to 25% in 2008; among women the figure went from 32% in 1991 to 44% in 2008.

"Jewish text books prevent the achievement of peace with the Arabs," wrote Dr Eli Budya, a lecturer at the University of Haifa. Russian journalist Dmitri Sumakov, who specialises in international drugs control, claims that "Israel is one of the most important world centres for the drugs trade and this trade is linked to senior Israeli officials". During an academic conference held in Kiev, Ukrainian academics accused Israeli companies of kidnapping 25,000 Ukrainians for their organs.

For many international institutions, Israel's crimes in Gaza were the straw that broke the camel's back with regard to their relationship with the Zionist state and the favouritism with which it has been treated. Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty International in the Middle East, says unequivocally: "According to international law, the siege of Gaza is collective punishment." Garrett Porto, the US author and political analyst claimed: "Israel fabricated documents published by the British newspaper, the Times, on Iran's atomic bomb." A study of the strategic consequences of recent international reports related to Israel have revealed that Israel is in an unenviable international position as these reports - chaired by Goldstone and Falk respectively  -  destroyed "the image it had created for itself over many decades and which cost it significant diplomatic, political, financial media effort as well as the efforts made by Jewish lobbies across the world; its moral image and the image of it as an ethical  state and army have fallen to such an extent that it is now compared on international forums to Apartheid in South Africa."

Despite the mild tone used in the UN's Goldstone Report, it revealed that Israel's "very moral" army used civilians as human shields and bombed civilian government buildings and mosques. As a result of these policies, Hampshire University in American withdrew its investment in six Israeli companies it had dealings with.

As a result of far-right, bordering on fascist Israeli policies, international rights organisations have started to pursue military and political elements within Israel deemed to bear responsibility for the Gaza war. Gabi Ashkenazi, the former IDF Chief of Staff, was forced to postpone travel arrangements to Brussels for a meeting between NATO leaders for fear of being arrested on war crimes charges. The Minister of Strategic Affairs, Moshe Yaalon, announced that he was prepared to give up visiting European capitals for the same reason. Former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni is wanted in more than one country for her role in such crimes. The matter has become so serious that the global climate summit held in Denmark refused permission for two Israeli delegates to take part; such is Israel's image on the world stage.

Many Israeli strategists fear for the future of the country, and according to a report prepared by America's Central Intelligence Agency the collapse of Israel is predicted within the next 20 years. The Director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs considers that Israel's future depends on its occupation of the West Bank: "The occupation of the West Bank is what will destroy Israel from within."

It is well known that the majority of psychological studies dealing with violence in Israel linked it to the actions of those responsible for violence in the territories occupied in 1967 in that they create the reactionary processes in the Israeli media and on the street. As such, Israel's future as a whole is linked to the situation that they live in and the state of internal disintegration which affects all aspects of life in Israel.

Intelligence officer Mitai Steinberg wrote in "Standing before their Fate", in which he warns of the foolishness of Israeli intransigence with regard to making peace with the Arabs and Palestinians, "Israel's evasion or failure to pay the price demanded by the settlement [i.e. Withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders] involves risk to the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state which is several times greater than ceding the region." The third study from the Ofa Institute entitled "The burden of the Israel-Palestine Conflict", edited by Professor Shlomo Sibirsky, deals with the burden of the conflict in eleven economic, social and military areas. It concludes that Israel has become a state subject to condemnation, ostracism and boycotts by many countries. Alongside all of this, we find that in his book called "Blood and religion", the British author and supporter of Israel, Jonathan Cook, says that Israel faces a future similar to that of South Africa.

The cries coming from the likes of Avraham Burg, Shulamit Aloni and Judge Barak warn of an evil reality that will engulf Israel which, since the moment it was established, considered us Palestinians a demographic threat. The secular documents have exposed the magnitude of this lie which continues to deceive large numbers and constitutes the ideological grounds for dealing with them. How do we pose a demographic threat when Israel exists in an Arab and Islamic region, and Palestinians with Israeli citizenship number just 1.3 million along with 5.5 million Jews. However, we only form a part of the total number of Palestinians in a diaspora of more than 10.5 million.

It is within this context that the idea of a two state-solution exists so that the reality of the illegal settlements is no hindrance. In any case, Israel has never negotiated with the Palestinians; rather it has always nurtured conflict with the Palestinians and the Arabs and the two-state solution is nothing more than a scattering of ash in the eye. Proposals of the two-state solution which cannot be implemented alongside discussions of the state is a form of strategic thinking. Discussions about the Jewishness of the state vis-a-vis the context of the strategic vision of such a  state necessitates that one of its most important components is the purity of the Jewish Ashkenazi people, of East European stock; the expulsion of Palestinians is a key aim.

In conclusion:

1. The project of the Jewish state has similar beginnings to colonialism and colonised states.
2. The project of the Jewish state was imposed on us, the Palestinians.
3. There is complete understanding among Zionists about our removal from our own land.
4. The Palestinians may be allowed a quasi mini-state with enough to ensure that we don't grow too strong, but that we don't starve.
5. The numbers of Jews in the state is equal to the number of Palestinians in historic Palestine but they are the minority to Palestinians in historic Palestine and the diaspora, who have a legal right to return to their country.
6. The aim is to transfer us from our land; that is, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
7. The clear indications are that the Zionist project of Israel is bound to implode, sooner or later.