14 January 2009

Justifying Aggression... the Pattern Emerges

Recall the "false intelligence" the US used to justify its military attack on Iraq? It appears Dubya wasn't the first.

All of the suffering in Gaza - indeed, all of the suffering endured by Palestinians under Israeli occupation for the last eight years - could have been avoided if Israel negotiated a peace agreement with Yasser Arafat when it had the chance, in 2001.

What chance? The official Israeli position is that there was no chance, "no partner for peace." That’s what Israeli leaders heard from their Military Intelligence (MI) service in 2000 after the failure of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations at Camp David. Arafat scuttled those talks, MI told the leaders, because he was planning to set off a new round of violence, a second intifada.

Now former top officials of MI say the whole story, painting Arafat as a terrorist out to destroy Israel, was an intentional fiction. That’s the most explosive finding in an investigative report just published in Israel’s top newspaper, Ha’aretz, by one of its finest journalists, Akiva Eldar.

What's the saying about the first casualty of war being truth? 'twould appear truth is lost long before a single weapon is dropped or drawn.

The US and Israel appear to be intimately linked through the power players who are manipulating both countries. Their shock and awe techniques and their manufactured justifications for war are the same. It's not clear to me anymore which country is mimicking which. If the power players are the same, that question is moot.

Recommend this post