Since Harry Truman in May 1948 was first among world leaders to recognize the new Jewish state on stolen Palestinian land, the US, other Western nations, and their establishment media one-sidedly supported its ruling regimes—ignoring their high crimes of war, against humanity, and persecution of long-suffering Palestinians.
Ordinary Palestinians long ago learned that they have no friends in Washington, nor in most other world capitals or Ramallah—betrayed by PA leadership since Oslo, serving as Israel’s enforcer after the formal sellout.
Their only recourse is resistance, their only hope for liberation, possible through long-term struggle alone—never by relying on Judas-goat leadership.
Why they’ve put up with the likes of Mahmoud Abbas, an illegitimate Israeli installed leader and likeminded cronies surrounding him, is hard to explain after decades of promises made and broken, betrayal replacing them.
His only responsible action is cutting ties with Israel, abandoning the sham Oslo Accords and resigning.
Whenever a moment of truth arose in the past, he took the low road, never the high one.
His public criticism of Trump’s annexation scheme with more of the same surely coming is hollow—likely to be followed by self-serving policies like always before.
No matter how much lipstick is applied to the Trump regime’s annexation scheme of the century, its provisions one-sidedly serve US/Israeli interests—at the expense of fundamental Palestinian rights denied.
AIPAC turned reality on its head, calling the scheme “ideas to resolve conflict [sic],” a way to “forego the path of violence, boycotts and the criminalization of differences at international forums and return to peace talks with Israel [sic].”
The no-peace/peace process is a near half-century scam—perpetrated on Palestinians jointly by the US and Israel.
Talks since the 1970s produced greater subjugation of Palestinians at the hands of a brutal US-supported occupier—what the scourge of Ziofascism is all about.
The NYT has been one-sidedly pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian throughout Jewish state history.
The Times downplayed the Trump regime’s one-sided deal, an editorial calling it “a cynical attempt at a diversion by two politicians in trouble, a sop to their right-wing bases as each leader vies for re-election,” adding, “Yet the conflict has gone on too long, with too much suffering, to dismiss any new initiative out of hand.”
Trump’s “negotiators…extensively consulted with Arab leaders, who would be needed to push the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, back to the negotiating table.”
“It revives the moribund two-state solution, and it covers all the major issues— Israel’s security, Jerusalem, the settlements, the right of return for Palestinian refugees and a $50 billion aid package for the Palestinians…”
“[B]y calling it a ‘vision’ rather than a ‘road map’ or ‘peace plan,’ Mr. Trump suggested, constructively, that it was open to the sort of bargaining at which he professes to be a genius.”
Fact: There’s nothing “genius” about geopolitical know-nothing Trump, a successful deal-maker in his own mind, not reality.
Fact: True enough the Trump/Netanyahu/concocted scheme diverts attention from their domestic troubles.
Fact: There’s been far too much “suffering” for over a century, all of its heaped on Palestinians by the scourge of Zionism and its Western allies, what the Times ignored.
Fact: Most regional leaders were bribed and pressured to go along with US policies, and of late with Israeli ones as well, few supporting Palestinian rights.
Fact: The US and Israel rejected a two-state solution long ago, pretending otherwise in rhetoric, not policies.
Fact: A real one never existed, clearly not by Trump and Netanyahu regime hardliners–B’Tselem equating their scheme to “Swiss cheese,” Israel getting the cheese, Palestinians the holes, left unexplained by the Times and other media.
Fact: Trump’s proposed $50 billion aid package is entirely earmarked for US, other Western and Israeli corporate interests, not for Palestinians, continued subjugation and neoliberal harshness intended for them.
Fact: Trump’s scheme isn’t a peace plan, a notion he, hardliners surrounding him, the vast majority of congressional members, and their Israeli counterparts abhor and reject.
Fact: Its only a road map is to oblivion, its vision to permanent Palestinian subjugation under Israel’s repressive boot.
What’s most important to explain about Trump’s annexation scheme of the century is ignored by establishment media, notably the Times.
Admitting Trump’s map amounts to “a patchwork of ethnic islands,” the Times acknowledged that it’s basically what already exists.
Netanyahu’s pledged four-year freeze on settlement construction isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
Pledging the same thing earlier for months, not years, illegal construction continued, the same pattern surely to repeat this time.
Denying Palestinians East Jerusalem as their exclusive capital and prohibiting diaspora Palestinians the right to return to their homeland as stipulated under international law alone is a non-starter—demands no responsible leadership would accept.
Nothing whatever in Trump’s scheme is acceptable to long-suffering Palestinians—a scheme to be rejected, never accepted.
Haaretz called the scheme “the joke of the century,” a slap in the face to long-suffering Palestinians, mocking their fundamental rights, erasing them from consideration.
Unanswered is whether Trump/Netanyahu effrontery will launch a third intifada.
It’s long overdue. For starters, Palestinians should remove their Judas-goat leadership and unite under new officials serving them all throughout the Territories, including besieged Gazans — overcoming Israel’s divide, weaken and control strategy.
New leaders serving them, not Israel, are needed to plan tactics for longterm struggle with clear objectives in mind.
United under new leadership there’s hope. Divided under traitors in Ramallah there’s none.
RSS
One-sided official Western and establishment media support for Israel
Posted on February 4, 2020 by Stephen Lendman
Since Harry Truman in May 1948 was first among world leaders to recognize the new Jewish state on stolen Palestinian land, the US, other Western nations, and their establishment media one-sidedly supported its ruling regimes—ignoring their high crimes of war, against humanity, and persecution of long-suffering Palestinians.
Ordinary Palestinians long ago learned that they have no friends in Washington, nor in most other world capitals or Ramallah—betrayed by PA leadership since Oslo, serving as Israel’s enforcer after the formal sellout.
Their only recourse is resistance, their only hope for liberation, possible through long-term struggle alone—never by relying on Judas-goat leadership.
Why they’ve put up with the likes of Mahmoud Abbas, an illegitimate Israeli installed leader and likeminded cronies surrounding him, is hard to explain after decades of promises made and broken, betrayal replacing them.
His only responsible action is cutting ties with Israel, abandoning the sham Oslo Accords and resigning.
Whenever a moment of truth arose in the past, he took the low road, never the high one.
His public criticism of Trump’s annexation scheme with more of the same surely coming is hollow—likely to be followed by self-serving policies like always before.
No matter how much lipstick is applied to the Trump regime’s annexation scheme of the century, its provisions one-sidedly serve US/Israeli interests—at the expense of fundamental Palestinian rights denied.
AIPAC turned reality on its head, calling the scheme “ideas to resolve conflict [sic],” a way to “forego the path of violence, boycotts and the criminalization of differences at international forums and return to peace talks with Israel [sic].”
The no-peace/peace process is a near half-century scam—perpetrated on Palestinians jointly by the US and Israel.
Talks since the 1970s produced greater subjugation of Palestinians at the hands of a brutal US-supported occupier—what the scourge of Ziofascism is all about.
The NYT has been one-sidedly pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian throughout Jewish state history.
The Times downplayed the Trump regime’s one-sided deal, an editorial calling it “a cynical attempt at a diversion by two politicians in trouble, a sop to their right-wing bases as each leader vies for re-election,” adding, “Yet the conflict has gone on too long, with too much suffering, to dismiss any new initiative out of hand.”
Trump’s “negotiators…extensively consulted with Arab leaders, who would be needed to push the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, back to the negotiating table.”
“It revives the moribund two-state solution, and it covers all the major issues— Israel’s security, Jerusalem, the settlements, the right of return for Palestinian refugees and a $50 billion aid package for the Palestinians…”
“[B]y calling it a ‘vision’ rather than a ‘road map’ or ‘peace plan,’ Mr. Trump suggested, constructively, that it was open to the sort of bargaining at which he professes to be a genius.”
Fact: There’s nothing “genius” about geopolitical know-nothing Trump, a successful deal-maker in his own mind, not reality.
Fact: True enough the Trump/Netanyahu/concocted scheme diverts attention from their domestic troubles.
Fact: There’s been far too much “suffering” for over a century, all of its heaped on Palestinians by the scourge of Zionism and its Western allies, what the Times ignored.
Fact: Most regional leaders were bribed and pressured to go along with US policies, and of late with Israeli ones as well, few supporting Palestinian rights.
Fact: The US and Israel rejected a two-state solution long ago, pretending otherwise in rhetoric, not policies.
Fact: A real one never existed, clearly not by Trump and Netanyahu regime hardliners–B’Tselem equating their scheme to “Swiss cheese,” Israel getting the cheese, Palestinians the holes, left unexplained by the Times and other media.
Fact: Trump’s proposed $50 billion aid package is entirely earmarked for US, other Western and Israeli corporate interests, not for Palestinians, continued subjugation and neoliberal harshness intended for them.
Fact: Trump’s scheme isn’t a peace plan, a notion he, hardliners surrounding him, the vast majority of congressional members, and their Israeli counterparts abhor and reject.
Fact: Its only a road map is to oblivion, its vision to permanent Palestinian subjugation under Israel’s repressive boot.
What’s most important to explain about Trump’s annexation scheme of the century is ignored by establishment media, notably the Times.
Admitting Trump’s map amounts to “a patchwork of ethnic islands,” the Times acknowledged that it’s basically what already exists.
Netanyahu’s pledged four-year freeze on settlement construction isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
Pledging the same thing earlier for months, not years, illegal construction continued, the same pattern surely to repeat this time.
Denying Palestinians East Jerusalem as their exclusive capital and prohibiting diaspora Palestinians the right to return to their homeland as stipulated under international law alone is a non-starter—demands no responsible leadership would accept.
Nothing whatever in Trump’s scheme is acceptable to long-suffering Palestinians—a scheme to be rejected, never accepted.
Haaretz called the scheme “the joke of the century,” a slap in the face to long-suffering Palestinians, mocking their fundamental rights, erasing them from consideration.
Unanswered is whether Trump/Netanyahu effrontery will launch a third intifada.
It’s long overdue. For starters, Palestinians should remove their Judas-goat leadership and unite under new officials serving them all throughout the Territories, including besieged Gazans — overcoming Israel’s divide, weaken and control strategy.
New leaders serving them, not Israel, are needed to plan tactics for longterm struggle with clear objectives in mind.
United under new leadership there’s hope. Divided under traitors in Ramallah there’s none.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.