Rebranding Judeophobia, Israelophobia from Right to Left & the Absurdity of the Left-Right Spectrum
Anti-Zionism is the anti-imperialism of fools
One bizarre sign of "leftist" convergence with "rightists" is the Obama administration. Obama's national insecurity advisor, Jim Jones, is supposed to give the major address to a konclave of the George Soros-funded pro-Arab, pro-Muslim jihadist, pro-PLO lobbying group called J Street. This group was not created by the grass roots of Jews in America, although it does have a following. It was created by Soros' money [collaborating with the Fenton PR firm] in order to supply public opinion support to Obama's anti-Israel, pro-Arab, pro-Muslim policies, necessarily undermining AIPAC in the process. This is because AIPAC is seen as an obstacle to Obama's racist policies against Israel, such as preventing Jews from living in Judea-Samaria.
Jones was a big general, and advocates using American military power throughout the world.
Marine Gen. James L. Jones (Ret.), the former head of NATO and U.S. forces in Europe and former commandant of the Marine Corps.He was born into a Marine family [here].
Jones has called for sending more troops to Afghanistan to avert defeat there. [see Washington Post at this link biographical information]. Jones exemplifies the outlook of the national security/national defense establishment in the United States.
He is now promoting an anti-Israel policy that was earlier promoted by Republicans, by Prez George Bush I in the early 1990s and by John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles in the 1950s.
Since the Dulles brothers' time, Israelophobia has successfully rebranded itself as it were, making it a "leftist" cause and a mystique of support for an allegedly ancient people, the "palestinians" previously unknown to history. Most of today's "left" serves the foreign policy establishment as a cheerleader for what were long ago Republican policies. I could go on and on about the fakery of what today's Left claims to be.
Those informed about psychological warfare techniques, which much overlap with advertising, may be aware [see Vance Packard's Hidden Persuaders] of how successful such rebranding and reimaging campaigns can be. I remember one of my girl cousins back in the late 1940s, early 1950s, smoking Marlboro cigarettes. The Marlboro package had the name Marlboro written esthetically in a red line of handwriting on a white background, apparently meant to appeal to women who considered themselves elegant if not glamorous, as my cousin saw herself. Then a few years later --Vance Packard describes the process-- Marlboro had a new package with the name in straight bold, angular printed capital letters, not the elegant feminine curves in red of a few years before. The smoker of Marlboro was now a real man, a he man, a cowboy riding a horse with cowboy boots on, etc. Marlboro was now a man's cigarette. That's probably how most people today think of Marlboro. And they remember that cowboy riding his horse. I'm sure that few remember, as I do, that it was once meant to be an elegant woman's cigarette.
So if a consumer product can change not just its image but its very sex, then the mindbenders must think that they can do anything. Israelophobia and a pro-Arab policy are no longer the province of hardboiled Republican friends of Big Oil --as were the Dulles brothers-- today it is softboiled and kindhearted. It is "leftist" and is Good for the "Third World." Even members of the foreign policy establishment and the national security establishment, like walt, mearsheimer, and General jim jones, can be considered friends of the Third World, enemies of Israeli aggression, etc. My feelings aren't hurt. Nowadays, higher oil prices too are depicted as Good for the Third World, Good for the world's poor, etc.
It should also be borne in mind that the invention of the "palestinian people" too, by British psychological warfare experts, was a necessary ingredient in this process of transformation of image.
The lion may not yet lie down with the lamb but the uncouth mob of "leftist" Israelophobes can break bread with the old school exponents of Realist, frankly immoral or amoral foreign policy, which the "leftists" too support de facto, and maybe de jure too. And all this is demonstrated by the upcoming J Street konclave and the identity of its invited and disinvited guests, entertainers, "poets", and speakers.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATING 10-29-09 "After he retired from the Marine Corps, Gen. Jones served as president and CEO of the Institute for 21st Century Energy — an industry-funded lobby and PR organization; and in 2008 he joined the Board of Directors of the Chevron Corporation, which has large operations in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar. He was appointed “security coordinator” for the Bush Administration’s Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts [sic!], and in 2008 issued a report which was not released, but which purportedly made “Israel look very bad”. He also proposed that security should be guaranteed by NATO troops after an Israeli pullout from Judea and Samaria"-- from Fresno Zionism [here]. Where do oil industry and Arab influences on Jones end & where does his concern for the American people's security begin, if at all??
"Leftist" speaker at semi-official JStreet bloggers conference supports Obama on Israel, supports Obama's racist policy against Jews living in Judea-Samaria [here], also says walt-mearsheimer provided necessary cover for J Street to exist, "I personally think they provided cover for J Street to be able to exist."
Former official of Pres. George Bush II's national insecurity council & State Dept tells J Street that Iranian regime has real "security concerns" & that calling A-jad a liar is "racist" [here].
Jennifer Rubin says that Obama's "administration seems awfully fond of it [= J Street]. Is it the Iranian excuse-mongering or the unhelpful platitudes. . ."? She asks. [see here]
Pro-Obama, pro-fascist "leftist" Nation magazine journalist wants to strip Israel of ancestral Jewish territory also needed for defense: "a final deal between Israel and Palestine will indeed require US security guarantees for Israel. Nearly everyone agrees on that" [here]