|
The Book That Can’t
Be Published In America
By Alan Hart,
author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews
11/14/07
"ICH" --- -- The question Americans asked in the immediate
aftermath of the horror of 9/11 was “Why do they hate us?” And
in many American minds the “they” of the question were not only
the violent Islamic fundamentalists who, according to the
official version of events, were solely responsible for bringing
down the Twin Towers, but Arabs and Muslims everywhere - about a
quarter of humankind.
Since that
particular shocking and awesome event, I have often asked myself
how different the world today might have been – how much less
destruction and killing there would have been - if President
Bush had said something like: “That’s a very good question. We
must and will seek the answer to it before we decide how to
respond.”
If an attempt
had been made to answer the question, the first thing that would
have been established is that the overwhelming majority of Arabs
and other Muslims everywhere do not hate Americans or
America. If they could, very many Arabs and other Muslims,
perhaps even half of them, would live in America to enjoy the
apparently good life there.
What they hate
is American foreign policy. And the underlying prime cause of
that hatred is Congressional and White House support for the
Zionist state of Israel right or wrong. But Israel’s
American-endorsed arrogance of power and contempt for
international law is only one of two factors in the equation
that, over the past 60 years, has seen Arab and other Muslim
hurt, anger and humliation turn to hatred on account of the
conflict in and over Palestine. The other is the impotence of
the regimes of the existing mainly corrupt and repressive Arab
Order, regimes which, genereally speaking, are perceived by
their masses to be, in effect, American-and-Zionist stooges.
On 11 September
2001, I was well into the writing of Zionism: The Real Enemy
of the Jews, so I didn’t start out with the idea of
answering the “Why do they hate us?” question, but the book does
provide for Americans a complete, comprehensive, detailed and
fully documented answer to it.
With The
Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Mearshimer and Walt have
provided taboo-breaking insight into one aspect of what used to
be called the Arab-Israeli conflict. My book is concerned with
the making and sustaining of the conflict in all of its aspects.
My purpose is to enable readers to make sense - I dare to say
for the first time ever in many cases - of the whole thing, by
seeing how all the pieces of the most complicated and complex
jig-saw puzzle fit together. And that’s why what happened behind
closed doors in London, Paris, Washington and Moscow has its
place in the story as I tell it as well as events in Palestine
that became Israel and the capitals of the Arab world. My
purpose is also to assist citizens to understand why a
resolution of the conflict has remained, and seems set to
remain, beyond the reach of politics and diplomacy, and who must
do what and why for justice and peace. The alternative is
catastrophe for all, and by all I don’t mean only the Arabs and
Jews of the region. I mean all of us wherever we live. (In
Volume One I recall an interview I did for the BBC’s Panorama
programme with Mother Israel, Golda Meir. At a point I
interrupted her to say: “Prime Minister, I want to be sure that
I understand what you’re saying… You are saying that if
ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield,
it would be prepared to take the region and the whole world
down with it?” Without the shortest of pauses for
reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or
intimidate American presidents according to need, Golda replied,
“Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.” Within an hour of
that interview being transmitted, The Times of London
changed its lead editorial. The new one quoted what Golda had
said to me and added its own opinion - “We’d better believe
her.”)
My only
reservation about M&W’s excellent presentation is over their use
of the term “Israel lobby”. Way back in 1980 when I used that
term in private conversation with Shimon Peres, who was then the
leader of Israel’s main opposition Labour Party and hoping to
become prime minister and deny Menachem Begin a second term in
office, he, Peres, said to me: “It’s not an Israel
lobby. It’s a Likud lobby.” The point being made was that
the lobby in America represented hardcore, uncompromising
Zionism and pushed (at least sometimes) for policies that were
not in Israel’s own long term best interests. For reasons
that my book makes clear, the phenomenon W&M have exposed
(supplementing Paul Findley’s They Dare To Speak Out) is
best and most accurately described as the Zionist lobby.
In my view and
also that of all real experts I know including, for example, the
two leading Israeli “revisionist” (honest) historians of our
time, Professors Ilan Pappe and Aviv Shlaim, the key to
understanding is knowledge of the difference between Judaism
and Zionism. The mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian or Western
world has been conditioned to believe that they are one and the
same thing. They are not. They are total opposites.
Judaism is the
religion of Jews (not “the Jews” because not all Jews are
religious), and, like Christianity and Islam, it has at its core
a set of ethical principles and moral values.
Zionism is a
secular, colonialist ideology which, in 1948, and mainly by
resorting to terrorism and ethnic cleansing, established a
state for some Jews in the Arab heartland. (At the time of
Zionism’s birth and first mission statement in 1897, its
colonial ambition was supported by only a very small minority of
the Jews of the world; and it can be said that without the
obscenity of the Nazi holocaust - a European crime for which,
effectively, the Arabs of Palestine were punished - Israel would
not have come into being). Simply stated, Zionism in action has
made a mockery of, and actually has contempt for, the ethical
principles and moral values of Judaism. Which is why those most
often described as “ultra orthodox” religious Jews say that
Zionism is destroying Judaism
-
For those who might wish to have a much
deeper understanding of the difference between Zionism and
Judaism than my book provides, I recommend another recently
published book – A Threat From Within, A Century of
Jewish Opposition To Zionism. Its author is a Canadian
Jew, Yakov Rabkin, who is Professor of History at the
University of Montreal. When Yakov was in London, I asked
him on-the-record a very explicit question: “Is it
reasonable to say that the Jews of the world now have a
choice to make - either to reaffirm or affirm their
commitment to Judaism and renounce Zionism, or to reaffirm
or affirm their commitment to Zionism and renounce Judaism?”
He replied with one word, “Yes!”
Knowledge of the
difference between Judaism and Zionism is the key to
understanding why it is perfectly possible to be anti-Zionist
(opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise either in whole or in
part) without being in any way, shape or form anti-Semitic.
The significance of that statement is in the following.
The false charge
of anti-Semitism is the blackmail card which the
obscenity of the Nazi holocaust enables Zionism to play to
silence criticism of its self-righteous and aggressive child,
Israel, and to suppress informed and honest debate about who
must do what and why for justice and peace. But when
citizens know the difference between Zionism and Judaism (and
the truth of history, of which more later) they do not have
to be frightened into silence, as most Gentiles currently are,
by the fear of being falsely charged with anti-Semitism for
criticising the Zionist state of Israel.
There is,
however, another reason why it is essential for the citizens of
the Western nations, among whom most of the Jews of the world
live, to be aware of the difference between Judaism and Zionism.
Knowledge of the difference is the explanation of why it is
wrong to blame all Jews for the crimes of the few (hardcore
Zionists in Israel/Palestine).
Though I was
aware that it would be very uncomfortable for many Jews, and
though I knew that it would provoke the Zionist lobby into red
flagging my book and doing its best ( I mean its worst) to cause
the book to be suppressed to the maximum posssible extent, I
insisted on Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews as the
title because it reflects in seven words two related truths for
our time.
The first is
that the sleeping giant of classical anti-Semitism has been
re-awakened in the mainly Gentile nations of the Western world
(where, to repeat, most of the Jews of the world live as
integrated citizens). The second is that the prime cause of the
re-awakening is the behaviour of the Zionist (not Jewish!) state
of Israel - as most of the best Jewish minds prior to the Nazi
holocaust feared would be the case if Zionism was allowed by the
big powers to have its way.
As background
context to the statement above there is the warning (quoted
opposite the title page of Volume Two of my book) of Yehoshafat
Harkabi, Israel’s longest serving and universally respected
Director of Military Intelligence. In his book Israel’s
Fateful Hour, first published in Hebrew in 1986, he wrote
the following (emphasis added):
“Israel is the
criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged.
Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character,
which finds free and concentrated expression within it.
Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any
flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism,
is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity
of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish
state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism,
was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis
must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not
only by them but also Jews throughout the world.”
It’s my view
that after the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, and because of
it, the giant most likely would have gone back to sleep,
remained asleep and, in all probability, would have died in its
sleep – IF Zionism had not been allowed by the major powers,
first Britain, then America, to have its way, as Balfour put it,
“right or wrong”. (There is a case for saying that with
British and American politicians as “friends”, the Jews of the
world have not needed enemies).
What, really,
is the basis for believing that anti-Semitism is seriously on
the rise? The increase in the
desecration of synagogues and Jewish graves (and the like),
verbal abuse and assaults on Jews are a pointer. But there is
something far more sinister. It’s what a growing number of
Gentiles, middle to upper class people in particular, are
thinking and now beginning to say behind closed doors and at
dinner parties. What do they say? “These fucking Jews!” And it’s
grown, this antipathy, in response to Israel’s arrogance of
power and the correct perception of Israel as the oppressor. And
the more it becomes apparent that Israel is the obstacle to
peace on any terms most Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims
could accept, the more this antipathy will grow, with the real
danger that it will break out, become unsuppressed, and manifest
itself as violent anti-Semitism.
As things are,
and look like going, Holocaust II, shorthand for another great
turning against Jews, is a real possibility in a foreseeable
future.
It’s also my
view, which I know is shared in private by some eminent Jews,
that if the monster of anti-Semitism goes on the rampage again,
it might well start its journey in America.
Two summary
reasons why:
* Many members
of Congress (past and present) hate themselves for doing the
bidding of the Zionist lobby. If the opportunity to let rip with
their suppressed, guilt-driven anger arises, they will want
revenge.
* The prime
pushers for the invasion of Iraq were neo-cons who are also
hardcore Zionists. While few want to admit this publicly, many
know it to be so.
QUESTION: What
can be done to eliminate the danger of the monster of
anti-Semitism going on the rampage again?
Short answer…
The Gentiles of the Western nations must be informed and
educated about the difference between Judaism and Zionism, and
thus why it is wrong to blame all Jews for the crimes of the
hardcore Zionist few. And that’s one of the reasons why I
devoted more than five years of my life to researching and
writing Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. I want to do
my bit to stop the monster of anti-Semitism going on the rampage
again. And that’s the essential difference between the Gentile
me and hardcore Zionists. They want, even need,
anti-Semitism, to justify their crimes - past, present and
future.
If and when I
take to the public speaking and debating trail coast-to-coast
across America (as I’ve done in the past), I will have the
following message for American audiences:
-
DON’T blame
the Jews who live among you for Zionism’s crimes.
-
DON’T even
blame the Zionist lobby for buying influence on American
foreign policy because it, the lobby, has only played the
game according to the rules.
-
DO blame
your corrupt, pork-barrel system of politics which puts what
passes for democracy up for sale to the highest bidders.
My book has two
central and related themes.
One is how
Israel, the child of Zionism, became its own worst enemy and a
threat not only to the peace of the region and the world, but
also the best interests of Jews everywhere and the moral
integrity of Judaism itself.
The other is
why, really, the whole Arab and wider Muslim world is an
explosion of frustration and despair waiting for its time to
happen.
The book is epic
in length (two volumes) as well as sweep and substance because
it is a complete re-writing of the history of the making and
sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine, replacing the
Zionist mythology upon which the first and still existing draft
of Judeo-Christian history is constructed with the documented
facts and truth of history. As I noted in an Open Letter to
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (published by
Information Clearing House on 7 November), the first draft of
history is mainly Zionist propaganda nonsense. At its core are
two myths.
One is that the
Zionist state of Israel has lived in constant danger of
annihilation, the “driving into the sea” of its Jews. The truth
of history is that Israel’s existence has never, ever, been
in danger. Not in 19448/49. Not in 1956. Not in 1967. And
not even in 1973. Zionism’s assertion to the contrary was the
cover which allowed Israel to get away where it mattered most,
America and Western Europe, with presenting its aggression as
self-defence and itself as the victim when it was, and is, the
oppressor.
The other is
that Israel has not had a Palestinian partner for peace. The
truth of history on this account is that the ground for peace on
the Palestinian side was prepared by Yasser Arafat as far
back as 1979 – more than a quarter of a century ago. In that
year, 1979, Arafat persuaded the Palestine National Council, the
highest decision-making body on the Palestinian side, to back
his policy of politics and, until then, unthinkable compromise
with Israel. (Unthinkable for Palestinians because accepting
Israel inside its pre-1967 borders required them to renounce
their claim to 78% of their land).
As I recorded in
my book Arafat (the title of the American edition, the
original title was Arafat, Terrorist or Peacemaker?), it
took him six long years to persuade first his Fatah leadership
colleagues and then other PNC members to accept the reality of
Israel’s existence. When the vote was eventually taken, in 1979,
it was 296 for his policy of politics and compromise and
four against. Arafat, who had risked his life as well as
his credibility to turn his people around, was then at the
height of his powers; and from that moment on, and as President
Carter knew, there could have been successful negotiations for a
real and lasting peace based on a genuine two-state solution -
Israel back behind its pre-1967 borders with Jerusalem,
preferably as an open city, the capital of two states.
The problem was
that Arafat did not have a partner for peace on the Israeli
side - because Zionism was not, and is not, interested in
peace on any terms the vast majority of Palestinians and other
Arabs and most Muslims everywhere could accept. It’s true that
in 1993, and thanks in part to President Clinton’s stage
management and pulling power, Arafat did have a “perhaps”
Israeli partner for peace in the shape of Yitzhak Rabin, but he
was assassinated by a gut-Zionist. And Rabin was succeeded by
Israeli leaders whose prime objective was to re-demonise and
destroy the Palestinian leader. Arafat the terrorist they could
handle. Arafat the peacemaker they could not. (Didn’t Barak
offer Arafat “95 percent” of everything he had said he wanted?
No, he did not! That, too, was a propaganda lie. Was Arafat
poisoned? Probably. Is his successor, President Abbas,
effectively an Israeli-and-American puppet? Sadly yes, or so it
seems. But even if he is, we can be certain of one thing. Stooge
leadership or not, the Palestinian people will never accept
crumbs from Zionism’s table in the shape of two or three
bantustans which they could call a state).
In my book and
on public platforms I also take head-on the matter of Israel’s
right or not to exist.
According to
first and still existing draft of history, Israel was given its
birth certificate and thus legitimacy by the UN Partition
Resolution of 29 November 1947. This is nonsense.
-
In the first place the UN without the
consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did
not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or
assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien
immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their
own.
-
Despite that, by the narrowest of
margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General
Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine
and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem
not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was
only a proposal – meaning that it could have no
effect, would not become policy, unless approved by the
Security Council.
-
The truth is that the General Assembly’s
partition proposal never went to the Security Council for
consideration. Why not? Because the US knew that, if
approved, it could only be implemented by force; and
President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition
Palestine.
-
So the partition plan was vitiated,
became invalid, and the question of what the hell
to do about Palestine (after Britain had made a mess of it
and walked away) was taken back to the General Assembly for
more discussion. The option favoured and proposed by the US
was temporary UN Trusteeship. It was while the General
Assembly was debating what do that Israel unilaterally
declared itself to be in existence – actually in
defiance of the will of the organised international
community, including the Truman administration.
The truth of the
time was that the Zionist state, which came into being mainly as
a consequence of Zionism terrorism and ethnic cleansing, had
no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to
exist unless ….. Unless it was recognised and legitimized
by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights
during the creation of the Zionist state. In
international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the
legitimacy it craved. And that legitimacy was the only thing
the Zionists could not take from the Palestinians by force.
Complete
understanding of the true nature of Zionism’s colonial
enterprise also requires knowledge of this fact. Most of the
Jews who went to Palestine in answer to Zionism’s call had no
biological connection to the ancient Hebrews. The incoming
Zionist Jews were mainly foreign nationals of many lands,
descended from those who became Jewish by conversion to
Judaism centuries after the fall of the ancient Jewish
kingdom of Israel and what is called the “dispersal” into
“oblivion” of its people. The notion that there were, are,
two entire peoples with an equally valid claim to the same land
is an historical nonsense. The relatively few Jews with
a valid claim were the descendants of those who stayed IN
Palestine through everything. They numbered only a few
thousand at the time of Zionism’s birth; they regarded
themselves as Palestinians; and they were fiercely
opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise - because they
rightly feared that it would make them as well as the
incoming, alien Zionist Jews enemies of the Arabs among whom
they had lived in peace and security. (Though not even many
of today’s Jews are aware of it, it is also a fact that the
return of Jews to the land of biblical Israel by the efforts of
man - one possible but woefully inadequate definition of Zionism
- was proscribed by Judaism).
The question
that should be answered by President Bush and all who are
demanding that Hamas recognise Israel is this: Which Israel
is to be recognised… Israel inside its borders as they were on
the eve of the 1967 war and thus in accordance with Security
Council Resolution 242, or a Greater Israel which, on a daily
basis, is grabbing more land and expanding its settlements on
the occupied West Bank?
There is, in
fact, no mystery about what Hamas’s real position is. If
tomorrow Israel said and meant that it was ready to
negotiate a full and final peace on the basis of a genuine
two-state solution - one that would see Israel back to its
pre-1967 borders with Jerusalem an open city and the capital of
two states, Hamas would say, “Let’s do the business”.
Hamas’s leaders
would say that, and mean it, because they are not stupid and
know they would have no choice – because a genuine
two-state solution is still what the vast majority of
Palestinians are prepared to settle for. But they are never
going to get it.
The truth of the
present is that the two-state solution is already dead,
if not yet buried….. killed by the settlement facts Israel has
created, and is still creating, on the West Bank - in
defiance of UN resolutions, in defiance of
international law, and even in defiance once upon a time
of the expressed wish of the Bush administration. At least on
the matter of illegal settlement activity, it IS the Zionist
tail that wags the American dog.
In the last
chapter of Volume Two of my book, A Resurrection, a
Crucifixion and a Road Map to Nowhere, I make the statement
that Zionism’s own end-game strategy for a final solution to the
Palestine problem now leaves nothing to the imagination.
Zionism’s in-Israel leaders and their lobbyists in America still
believe that by means of brute force and reducing them to abject
poverty, they can break the will of the Palestinians to
continue the struggle for their rights. The assumption being
that, at a point, and out of total despair, the Palestinians
will be prepared to accept crumbs from Zionism’s table in the
shape of two or three bantustans, or, better still, will abandon
their homeland and seek a new life in other countries. In my
view the conviction that Zionism will one day succeed in
breaking the Palestinian will to continue the struggle for an
acceptable minimum of justice is the product of minds which are
deluded to the point of clinical madness. (Some say that
Israel is on its way to becoming a fascist state. I think the
more appropriate terminology is lunatic asylum).
The question
that’s almost too awful to think about is something like this:
What will the Zionists do when it becomes apparent even to
them that they can’t destroy Palestinian nationalism with bombs
and bullets and brutal repressive measures of all kinds?
My guess is that
they, the Zionists, will go for a final round of ethnic
cleansing - to drive the Palestinians off the West Bank and
into Jordan and beyond. That, I fear, will be Zionism’s final
solution to the Palestine problem… If that happens, the West
Bank will be turned red with blood, mostly Palestinian blood.
And honest reporters will describe it as a Zionist holocaust.
But that does
not have to be the end of the story of Palestine. There
still could be a new beginning.
Many years ago,
in the Introduction to my first book, Arafat, Terrorist or
Peacemaker? I said that, generally speaking, the Jews are
the intellectual elite of the Western civilisation and the
Palestinians the intellectual elite of the Arab world. What
those two peoples could do together in peace and partnership
was, I suggested, the stuff that real dreams are made of.
They could change and develop the region for the better and, by
so doing, give much needed hope and inspiration to the whole
world. I still believe that dream could be made to come true,
but only within the context of a ONE STATE solution to
the Palestine problem. By definition it would be secular,
democratic state in which all of its citizens, Arabs and Jews,
would enjoy equal rights.Yes, that would mean the de-Zionisation
of Palestine, but it would not mean the end (any kind of
end) for the Jews now living in Israel/Palestine. Those who
wished to stay as citizens of a de-Zionised Palestine would at
last have peace with enduring security.
My book’s
Epilogue is titled The Jews as the Light Unto Nations,
and it ends with the following words, my words, which also have
pride of place on the back jacket of Volume Two:
If the Jews of
the world can summon up the will and the courage to make common
cause with the forces of reason in Israel before it is too late
for us all, a very great prize awaits them. By demonstrating
that right can triumph over might, and that there is a place for
morality in politics, they would become the light unto nations.
It is a prize available to no other people on earth because of
the uniqueness of the suffering of the Jewish people. Perhaps
that is the real point of the idea of the Jews as Chosen People…
Chosen to endure unique suffering and, having endured it, to
show the rest of us that creating a better and more just world
is not a mission impossible.
Why do I think
it is important for Americans to know the truth of history as it
relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over
Palestine and who must do what and why for peace?
Short answer:
Because of the awesome influence of the Zionist lobby (as
documented by Mearshimer and Walt and before them former
Congressman Paul Findley), no American President is ever going
to summon up the political will to call and hold Zionism to
account unless and until he or she is pushed to do so by
informed public opinion - by a manifestation of real democracy
in action. The problem in America, generally speaking, is that
public opinion is too uninformed (and mis-informed) to do the
pushing - to make democracy work for justice and peace.
Why can’t
Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews be published in
America?
Short answer:
Because Zionism does not want it to be; and all American
publishers, the minors as well as the majors, are, apparently,
too frightened of offending Zionism as much as they would need
to do by taking my book on.
It was,
actually, the same story in the UK, despite the fact that my
literary agent received letters and other messages of rare
praise for my work from the CEO’s of some of the major
publishing houses. One such letter, from which I quote in the
first paragraph of Volume One of my book as published in its
first edition hardback form, describes my manuscript as
“awesome… driven by passion, commitment and profound learning.”
This letter added, “There is no question it deserves to be
published.” But when push came to shove, I had to set up my own
publishing company. I was not supposed to get access to the
retail trade. I did but… To sell well through the retail trade,
books need publicity. The prime provider of it for the general
reading public is the media, but not in the case of my book. Not
one newspaper or magazine and not one radio or tv programme was
prepared to give my book any attention, review or other. The
media’s complicity in the suppression of the truth of history,
and the betrayal of democracy, proved to be rock solid. That’s
the situation here and in the UK (and throughout Western
Europe), and I know it’s worse, much worse, in the “Land of the
Free”.
In the Preface
to Volume Two I say I have no doubt that publishers, editors
and politicians who are complicit in the suppression of the
truth of history honestly believe that they are serving the best
interests of the Jews as well as their own short-term vested
interests. And I go on to say to them all (publishers, editors
and politicians) the following: “You are wrong. Dangerously
wrong. By refusing to come to grips with the truth of history
and, in particular, the difference between Judaism and Zinism
and why it is perfectly possible to be passionately anti-Zionist
without being anti-Semitic, you are helping to set up all Jews
to be blamed for the crimes of the relative few.”
And I conclude
with the following observation:
“It would also
be helpful if more than a few of the Jews who live in the
nations of the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian world could find
the will and the courage to end their silence on the matter of
Israel’s “misconduct” (Harkabi’s terminology), and come to grips
with the fact that Zionism is, as the title of this book asserts
and its substance demonstrates, their real enemy. Silence is not
the way to refute and demolish a charge of complicity in
Zionism’s crimes.”
The problem for
Zionism with my book is its title. The prime source of Zionism’s
power, blackmail and other, is its success to date in persuading
the guilt-ridden Gentile world that Judiasm and Zionism are one
and the same thing. The more people become aware that this is
not so, and that it’s therefore perfectly possible to be
passionately anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic, the more
naked and vulnerable Zionism will become. Only then will
stopping the countdown to catastrophe for all be a mission
possible; and only then will peace have a chance – its very last
chance.
In their Preface
to The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Mearshimer and
Walt write that the United States will not be able to address
vexing problems in the Middle East effectively “if Americans
cannot have a civilised conversation about our interests in the
region and the role of all the factors that shape U.S. foreign
policy, including the Israel lobby. To encourage that continued
conversation, we have written this book.”
I wrote my book
to empower citizens to participate in informed and honest debate
and play their necessary part in making democracy work for
justice and peace in the Middle East. If there are Americans
who want to step up to the plate and assist me to get my version
of the truth of history to their fellow citizens - then it will
be “game on”. And this ‘ain’t Little League.
Alan Hart, author of Zionism:
The Real Enemy of the Jews
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
