- The re-election of President Bush is a sad event; the
failure of Kerry is not. Before the election, we called upon our American
readers to vote for a Third Candidate. Some readers agreed and voted -
for Nader or Greens or whomever their consciences were happy with. Today
they have nothing to regret. Others objected, often vehemently, and proclaimed
the main advantage of Kerry, namely: he is not George W Bush. Now those
of you who did so are upset, and along with you many Europeans; they still
regret the defeat of John Kerry.
-
- This is a good time to re-read The Pickwick Papers by
Charles Dickens. In this hilarious novel, a rogue and gold-digger Jingle
elopes with a spinster Aunt Rachael; her relations, led by Mr Pickwick,
apprehend the couple of their way to Gretna Green and pay off the rogue.
The spinster was greatly saddened, but she was saved from a worse, lasting
and painful disappointment.
-
- Be comforted: the red-state voters played a Pickwick
on you and saved you from a big disillusionment. Kerry and Bush were in
full agreement regarding the war in the Middle East, from Palestine to
Afghanistan, including Iraq and Iran. They were in full agreement on any
point that really matters for the great majority of voters. Americans were
allowed to choose who will bomb Iran and support Israel, privatise water
and electricity, ruin families, promote alienation and profane the world
such policies were never in dispute. Kerry supported Bush by voting to
authorize the war in Iraq, for an increase in the Pentagon budget, for
the Patriot Act, for the "right" to pre-emptive war. Kerry was
politically situated between Joseph Lieberman and Dianne Feinstein. Kerry
was supported by our adversaries: the New York Times, George Soros, and
organised Jewry who gave him 80% of their vote. The only points Kerry differed
on were those we objected to: gun control and other liberal-totalitarian
shibboleths.
-
- If John Kerry had won, our situation would be worse:
he would have continued the policies of Bush and put a claim on much of
the world's good will. His victory would have allowed the US to broaden
their Coalition of the Willing; anti-war voices in Britain and elsewhere
in Europe would die out; the main newspapers would call upon Europe to
support this brand new American leader. The liberal opposition to the war
represented by the Nation would lose its voice. The rift between the US
and the rest of the world would shrink and heal while the US would continue
to perpetuate the same policies that caused the rift in the first place.
In short, victory of John Kerry would be a godsend for the Corporate US.
Mercifully, this outcome was avoided.
-
- The US of the second Bush's second presidency is now
more isolated than ever. Many European leaders had expressed their hope
that Bush would be removed; now they will have difficulty coming back under
the US aegis. The anti-war campaign will be able to continue unabated.
We shall have the liberals as our allies: provided they agree to the proposition
of Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch: "Set aside your quaint obsession
with abortion and the rights of gays to marry each other. All in under
the big tent. One party under God!" [1]
-
- This view is consistently upheld by this list. John Spritzler
of http://www.newdemocracyworld.org/ wrote: "If we drive people away
from the anti-war movement because they don't have the "correct"
views on issues like same-sex marriage or gun control or abortion or affirmative
action or immigration, then we're only shooting ourselves in the foot".
Indeed, it is the time to bring forth a Popular Front of all forces, whether
'progressive' or 'conservative,, against the War Party.
-
- Our chances improved in these elections as the pro-Judaic
forces took a beating: our friend Cynthia McKinney once defeated by the
Lobby[2], came back victorious. The great Zionist Tom Daschle was booted
out by people of South Dakota. Jim Moran who was demonised for his statement
that the "strong support" of the Jewish community was driving
the push toward a war with Iraq, won the election. Tom Coburn, who objected
to TV screening of the Schindler List, also survived unscathed.
-
- Our adversaries, strongest asset, their dominant position
in the mainstream media, lost its magic touch. Has Hollywood become a liability
for the Democrats? asks Reuters [3], while Noonan in the Wall Street Journal
[4] pontificated: "Who was the biggest loser of the 2004 election?
The mainstream media. Every time the big networks and big national newspapers
tried to pull off a bit of mischief - the yeomen of the blogosphere and
AM radio and the Internet took them down. It was to me a great historical
development in the history of politics in America. It was Agincourt. It
was the yeomen of King Harry taking down the French aristocracy with new
technology and rough guts."
-
- Judging by these results, the Judaic hold on American
discourse is slipping. But we won't repeat the error of Justin Raimondo
of Antiwar.com who was gleefully pleased with what appeared as a Jewish
setback after the first Bush victory four years ago - a few months later,
we learned of the Neo-Cons.
-
- "'The Congress remains very strongly pro-Israel.
It's always a question, are you going to get 80 or 83 on a pro-Israel initiative
in the Senate. That's terrific,, said one Jewish fund-raiser who distributes
money to pro-Israel candidates in both parties." reported the Jerusalem
Post[5]. The Lobby is still extremely strong, but now we know: there are
many, many Americans, who would like to take it down a rung or two.
-
- Our list is pointing out to the winning strategy: the
union of traditional isolationist conservatives and left radicals against
the US interventions overseas, or in spiritual terms for Christ and against
the double paradigm of Mammon and Zionism. The losing strategy was offered
by some anti-Christian Kerryites who posted a map of post-election America:
the Red states were marked "Jesus-land", the Blue "The
US of Canada". The religious affiliation of the posters is too obvious
to ponder. They want to turn their electoral defeat into an ideological
victory of their anti-Christian policies. For us this dichotomy is unacceptable:
a Red state, South Dakota, kicked out Daschle the Zionist, a Blue state,
California, gave victory to an equally nasty Tom Lantos. This is the only
criterion we are ready to apply.
-
-
- Suggested reading: on the left, Alexander Cockburn on
www.counterpunch.com
-
- On the right, Justin Raimondo on www.antiwar.com
-
-
- You may subscribe to my mailing list, it will bring you
my articles and an
- occasional forward, by sending a blank email to
- shamireaders-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
- The items published in the group can be seen on
- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shamireaders/messages
- Visit my sitewww.israelshamir.net
- For a discussion group, subscribe to togethernet,
- togethernet-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Israel Shamir
- info@israelshamir.net
-
-
- [1] www.counterpunch.com
-
- [2] http://www.rense.com/general27/ode.htm
-
- [3]http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=
- 2CAEBKTOMTZK0CRBAEKSFEY
- ?type=politicsNews&storyID=6732780
-
- [4] http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/
-
- [5] http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=J
- Post/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1099282972036
|
