INSULT !

INSULT !

Dreyfus, The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/541196/print
USA Today, AP writer Matthew Lee
http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=pressconnects&sParam=33037203.story

Managed News by Israeli Jews
-- how they are able to pull it off.



1. Omit all account of the provocative insult to Biden who had declared “no space” between the U.S.-Isreal – predicated partly on the context of assumptions agreed to by Netanyahu and Obama including restraint on settlements. But the details were not openly discussed, and what made the announcement most insulting was its cancellation of this assumption.

<=This ignoring of anything pertaining to Israel’s deliberate intent to insult the US follows the encased-in-cement rule never to allow Israel to be framed in a culpable position. It cannot do anything unjustified as a nation, because it is an autonomous entity and its official acts are justified because Israel officially does them. It doesn’t commit ‘murder’ –Dubai was State targeted assassination. At least, that’s what it would be “If Israel did it”, in the words of Alan Dershowitz. It’s official line neither affirms nor denies. Strategic ambiguity. That’s them.

Nor was the formal dinner in Jerusalem an “insult”, even if the Bidens are thinking and drinking to one set of understandings while their grinning, cunning hosts are thinking and drinking to precisely their destruction.

The New York Times wouldn’t call it an insult. Their editorial also focused on Biden’s condemnation of the announced settlements rather then the impact of its timing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/opinion/11thu1.html?scp=1&sq=Biden%20Israel%20editorial%20&st=cse They do say, however, ” it is hard to see the timing as anything but a slap in the face to Washington.” A “Bump in the Road” headed their Letters abouit it, none very righteously indignant.

A startled (if feigned) Mikah Brzezinsky on MSNBC’s Mornin’ Joe went “wha.. why do they ALWAYS do that… ?” – quickly segued.


2. The main psychodynamic feature becomes the FIERCE DENUNCIATION of “the Obama administration”. “Harsh talk”, “unusually blunt response”. Dreyfus cites Axelrod, Crowly as those who “chime in”. Lord knows the lines must have been smokin’ for 43 minutes while Hillary was on the horn to Bibi. I expect she got his attention. The blast was spurred by the insult, but its substantive content was condemnation of settlement expansion. The latter was what mattered to the expanders, and remained as a fiat accompli after the flap almost as if that played a diversionary part in it. It can always be apologized for if pressed, as Netanyahu has done.

3. “…IGNITED A FIRESTORM in Congress and among powerful pro-Israel interest groups who say the critcism of Americas top Mideast ally was misplaced.” (USA Today) “A bipartisan parade of lawmakers and interest groups (AIPAC is mentioned)…outpouring of anger” at condemnation of Israel.

“overwrought rhetoric”, Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.

“Now we’ve had our spat,” said John McCain, “its time to get our eye back on the goal—the peace talks” ( now preemptively skewed in Israel’s favor, with removal of trust)

“Let’s cut the family fighting, the family feud,” Joe Lieberman said.
(twHS: the phrase ‘family feud’ begs fundamental questionS)


Summary: By: 1. instigating a vehement ‘venting’ response; 2. splitting off the cause of the heatedness as damaging to Israel; 3. ‘igniting’ counter attack that scorns the excess emotionality (‘hysterical Dems’); 4. a “new status quo” favorable to the insulters is arrived at at the expense of the insulted. They are left to froth, gurgle, squinch

Israel's Insult

TEXTING ISRAEL’S INSULT TO VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN

– NYTIMES

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/israels-challenge-to-the-u-s/


American-Israel supporters => Swine herd entered by demons cast out of possessed Vatican children .

I. Aaron David Miller, Woodrow Wilson International Center
a former U.S. negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations, is a now a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center, where he is writing a new book “Can America Have Another Great President?”

Dancing With a Bear – (Russia replaced by Israel meme.)

”If you’re hoping for an Israeli-American war, I wouldn’t bet on it: shared values (x), a strong pro-Israeli community (x) and America’s need to cooperate with Israel to advance and protect its own interests preclude it.” “The last (x) thing an overextended president needs is a big fight with Israel and its supporters.“

(subtext: political threat: don’t even think of it, Obama ) But: x =not: preventive war, state targeted assassinations. X. => not America’s interests. There is massive evidence refuting this: never voted on; The Lobby neverchallenged; "Israel’s need to cooperate with America”

II. Daniel Gordis, Shalem Center



is senior vice president of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem. His most recent book, “Saving Israel: How the Jewish People Can Win a War That May Never End,” received a 2009 National Jewish Book Award.

A Region Devoid of Trust

“Admonishing Israel that planning additional Jewish housing in East Jerusalem “undermines the trust we need,” Vice President Biden accidentally pointed to a problem his own president has helped create — a complete absence of trust.

"Israelis do not trust Barack Obama… Obama has convinced Israelis that he has no command of the issues, and that he is predisposed to pressuring Israel much more than the Palestinians. It is Obama who is unwittingly fueling the pro-settlement movement.”

It’s Biden/America’s fault for electing Obama? – a total toady if there ever was one

III. Amjad Atallah, New America Foundation (<= revenant)

U.S. Restraint, Israeli Demands

“Israel’s announcement of 1,600 new settlement units in Arab East Jerusalem, coming during Vice President Biden’s visit, and the previous day’s announcement of 112 new settlements elsewhere in the Occupied West Bank, should not be seen as one-off slaps at the United States.”

( ? Whatever that means)

“In many ways they are a culmination of this Israeli government’s efforts to “teach” President Obama what he can and can’t do to defend American interests in the Middle East.”

The “naughty boy” teaching Nanny how she’s to treat “me”.
THE CATHOLIC BIDEN WILL TAKE IT BECAUSE OF WWII Catholic guilt card, “SATANIC VATICAN” IN PLAY. The historical subtext of the interaction in Jerusalem is Catholics and Jews – “America” is defined by each separately and differently – SHE’s being TORN APART <= COMPENSATED BY LOVE NESTING WITH CHILDREN

MASSA’S PROPER ‘TRUTH DEFENSE’ -- ‘if that’s what you want to call it’, let that be what it is – ‘anti-semitism’—hatred of Jews looped through “anti-‘ism. IS AVOIDED BECAUSE IT WOULD BE DAMAGING TO ISRAEL=> IT TAGS THE SATANIC FACTOR INTRODUCED BY …Frum and Bush.

STICKIN’ IT IN/TO BIDEN

crucified Massa …”son of the Devil’s spawn” (Jesus’ charge against the Jews of his day. John 8.44) Massa is a psychotwist (a crafted Jungian Mysterium^Conjunctionis (M^O): both A. Jesus casting the demons out of the child; and B. the one who is a ’full of it”: gross-guy ‘bad boy’; probably neutral-to-pro torture; willing to ‘square’ use of the Evil Grammar from his own resources. It depends on which side he is seen from  which way the token is turned into text.
(<=response to naked shower scene vs. Rahm Emanuel
(< ”did you ever have an argument with a naked man in a shower?” – text-token interchange “man” to “Jew” by the mental picture of the undressed Catholic male )

-comes as U.S. peace process broker, TO SET THE GRAMMATICAL STAGE (rules for use of the old tokens as text – ‘formal agreements’) for George Mitchell to follow up, in ‘indirect’ shuttle-diplomacy talks. He states publicly upon arriving:: 1. identity of interests…not true; but no one will gainsay; his is “political predication” on the point at issue, which has never been voted on. 2. defense agreement: a threat to one is a threat to the other-- pointed at Iran: which he is not authorized to do. 2. predicates on 1. through the ‘o8-9 election swerved to give Biden token authority to “speak for the American people” and declare policy. Against the background assumption that freezing settlements was an Israeli good will gesture to woo Palestinian’s trust, the double announcement of their continuation, once as they arrived; again next evening, dining with the Netanyahus; can only be taken as a deliberate insult, and was so seen around the media, if tucked away. In fact, or so it seemed to me, an eerie, somber silence fell on over the land and peoples, everyone blinking twice and sucking breath, waiting … following Gaza, implicating America in its charged war crimes; state targeted assassination by secret service agents in Dubai; irrational belligerence toward Iran, using threat of nukes; 911 anthrax false flag/war on Iraq unresolved…all that “Israel” has come to mean.

3. The desecration of America – staged as if America, through its bond with Israel, desecrated itself, with "Obama".

(U.S. is programmed not to see, relate to this attitude. But all one has to go by in relating to another is what comes off them in communication.)


IV David Makovsky, co-author of “Myths, Illusions and Peace” the Ziegler Distinguished Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the director of its Project on the Middle East Peace Process, is the co-author with Dennis Ross of “Myths, Illusions and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East.”

Netanyahu and the Blind Side

Argues that Netanyahu probably WAS blindsided…b/c “It would have been self-defeating for the Israeli leader to sabotage a friendly visit.”

Guess that refutes that. Did Netanhyahu know? – would be MOST INSULTING INTERPRETATION Sitting there all night under false pretenses. ….Next day, Biden make him wait 90 minutes for formal dinner, apparently in pique.

“NAH.. HE WOULDN’T DO DAT… NOT IN HIS INTEREST. Does he look suicidal to you?” (Arg.: “If he did it, that would verify the worse one could think of him and his cause; therefore he can’t (rationally) be thought of as (rationally) intending it himself.”

The terror of the logical situation is, that they don’t see anything wrong in such ‘arguments’– a little tilted, maybe, but what’s not. It’s politics; last thing expected is scrupulocity. Rational persuasion? lol

Almost as terrifying is consideration of those who are Blind Sided into thinking this is an argument because they don’t want to think ill of Netanyahu or blame Israel for any thing, heaven forbid.

The line correcting these arguments cannot be held because the conclusions point to Israeli. It looks like nit picking the Holocaust, or snorkeling your bunkmate. They come off as ‘more intelligent’ than anyone who would challenge the discourse, because they control the grammar shifts. They ‘know which way the wind is blowing”, and what to say next.

V. Nathan Brown, Carnegie Endowment Professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University and a nonresident senior associate in the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

A Dust-Up Obscures Far Deeper Problems

The policy of isolating Hamas and Gaza has not only had devastating humanitarian consequences; it has actually led to the Islamist movement’s entrenching itself even more deeply in control of the economy and political system of Gaza.

And the idea of negotiations at the present time — when the Palestinian leadership lacks the ability and the Israeli leadership lacks the willingness to build the basic elements of a two state solution — will lead to talks only for the sake of talks.
Only near-objective, serious peace

VI. Daoud Kuttab, Palestinian journalist is a Palestinian journalist and a former Ferris professor of journalism at Princeton University.

When Obama Blinked (The Other side of the coin)

"Sometimes when a difficult relationship is in its formative phase something occurs that establishes its parameters. This is exactly what happened between Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu.

The two had climbed their respective opposing trees on the issue of the prerequisite of a total settlement freeze as a prelude to beginning of peace talks. When they met in New York last Sept. 20, President Obama blinked first, leaving the embarrassed Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, hanging on the tree.

In his public statement the U.S. president scaled down from his (and Secretary Clinton’s) previous calls for a settlement “freeze” to accepting Israel’s offer of a settlement “restraint.” Once it became clear that the Americans will not stand up to Israel on settlements, everyone knew their place in this relationship.
Despite the White House’s latest protestation of the embarrassment meted to Vice President Biden, the Obama administration has only itself to blame…. a result of the American president’s weak knees …
If President George W. Bush truly believed, and President Obama truly believes — as they both publicly stated — that an independent, viable and contiguous Palestinian state is in the “national interest” of the United States, Washington must resolve once and for all that any Jewish settlement built on Palestinian territory forcefully taken in 1967 will not be tolerated.

BOTTOM LINE

VII. Michele Dunne is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and editor of the Arab Reform Bulletin, a monthly online journal.

Ill Will All Around

“…exposes painfully the poor state of relations between the Obama administration and Israel. Although Prime Minister Netanyahu most likely was blindsided by the announcement, others in his coalition apparently thought it unproblematic to insult Biden and by association Obama.” (doesn’t really make any difference whether he was or not ..someone inside did, and set him up to take the heat next day)

Obama also failed to show strength by imposing some consequence on Netanyahu when the Israeli leader refused to order a real freeze on settlements.

So now there is ill will and a lack of respect all around. The Palestinians probably hope this will redound to their benefit in the form of U.S. pressure on Israel, but it is more likely that Obama will see this episode as reason to disassociate himself from peace efforts even more than he has done in the past few months.
The Obama administration’s calls for a settlement freeze during 2009 differed from those of previous administrations because they were clear and unambiguous. The idea was to restore faith in the possibility of a negotiated solution to the Arab Israeli conflict by persuading Israel to make a gesture on this very important issue (The sub-text was that Israel’s settlement restraint was a good faith gesture, inviting Palestinian trust. Thus, when violated, terminated the conditions for peace talks.)


-How they look on MSNBD when they say “The one enjoying this most is Ahmadinejad!”…screwed up “No more Yuckee than this” face.

David Brooks Bawdlerizing the 60's

David Brooks Bawdlerizing “The 60’s”

(Or: How Textualist Metaphysics Misreads the “Tea Party Movement”)

("recently a piece in Salon astutely compared Glenn Beck to Abbie Hoffman")

“The Wal-Mart Hippies” (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/opinion/05brooks.html) is perhaps David Brooks’ most brilliant, and at the same time most self-condemning philosophical excursion yet. Which, though he cannot speak as a member of the 60’s generation, he is willing to sagely compare current Right wing disaffection, only illustrates how it had to turn out, under Jung’s law of opposites*. Apotheosis of any one-sided point of view ineluctably exposes its other. Brooks’ one-sidedness in comparing the mainly student led uprising of the ‘60’s to the Tea Party movement of ‘09ff consists in largely ignoring the Vietnam war's impact on that generation. In that context, the comments that “both movements have a problem with authority”, involving “belief in conspiracy theories”, are bizarre.

Faced by the Vietnam war draft, 60’s youth by no means stirred to “street theatre, mass rallies, marches and extreme statements” in order to “shock polite society out of its stupor”, or stop runaway federal spending.

Nor, conversely, do Tea Party leaders protest the Afhanistan war.

By dropping the Vietnam war* as motive of the 60’s revolt, Brooks omits reference to what justified it (the revolt). By inserting runaway federal spending* as major justification of the ’09 revolt, he omits reference to the unjustified military expenditures responsible for it (runaway federal spending). Such cunning surely deserves the description of “old Jew snake brain”, one of The Learned Elders even.



Brooks cunningly draws the comparison in a way that doubles the hate: Old Hippies, activists like Saul Alinsky (?), already despised,, now Wal-Mart Hippies.

Brooks deftly disposes of what they* “believe” by overlaying the unfocused (inchoate, confused, obsessed, deranged) group convulsed by rage, anger, hate; comprised of bigots, anti-semites, homophobes, misogynists’ Patriot Militia types, McVeigh admirers, …

This is, by smearing them with WSJ Goldman Sachs Rightwing Id talk. Doesn’t mean they don’t love ‘em. Quite the contrary. There are two wings of Rightwing Id talk: WSJ rich folks (elitists)  Sarah Palin (creation of neocon Wm. Kristol, Lieberman) common folk (Fox News, Hannity. O’Reilley, Beck; and “conservative talk radio show hosts”, ex. Limgaugh.”.

Brooks can smash their grammar while preserving his (elite aloofness).

Like The Set of All Sets, an impossible logical construction (and, not coincidentally, Georg Cantor’s definition of “God”), the ’Tea Party movement’, as Brooks calls it*. Roundup of ‘the bad ones’ on the right is a totality contrived mostly from projection of (it’s own; but also of) the MSM “Left”. Altogether, a pretty loose bag on which hang any but the most arcane collective predicate. But, as a lot, Brooks finds they are most like the old New Left of the 60’s, aka “Wal-Mart Hippies”.

***
ps. I met Abbie Hoffman at Harpur College, at the old Vestal Steak House off Bunn Hill Rd.

POISONED DISCOURSE

POISONED DISCOURSE AT ALL-TIME HIGH

Grammatical, Metaphysical, and Geometo-Political Reflections
On Today’s Completing Totality (March fourth, 2010)


Parts. 1. What it* is (definition)
2. Examples.
A. Common Type
B. Specific: Germany’s holocaust/Americanthrax attack.

3. Explanation: the templates behind the grammars

Part 1.

Discourse* may be regarded as ‘poisoned’ (“poisoned discourse*”) when, in matters of life and death, calling attention to it*s character as this-or-that is accusatory, bringing oneself under suspicion of harboring hatred, aligning with enemies, and/or plotting to kill it’s* users. The aroused suspicions are invariably screamed at as irrational, malicious, insane, dangerous, beyond the pale… (*see footnote for further amplification)

Alternately: terms used in such a manner that those who participate in its grammar become complicit in self-condemning applications and implications. The grammar of the pronoun “we” to express agreement with those using it according to rules that incur complicity in its applications and implications). Or: dangling terms whose use invokes tacit sanctions (ex.: “delusional plan…”) expected to be picked up – rejected or approved – in further conversation (“..to conquer Afghanistan”).

Part 2. Examples

A. Common Type

Featuring as common singularity: talk about, with, by the signs “war” (word token) and “911” (number token designator), as used in the sentence:

S*i “911 justified (the) war (on terror)” (or “..was used to justify..”: these can be taken as grammatically identical for present purposes). The words “the ‘, “on terror” are inserted in parenthesis only to supply context of use recognized in actual common discourse.

Risky to Disagree

Challenging these uses, as by Alex Jones’ shouting “911 IS AN INSIDE JOB!” into a bull horn; or by ‘speaking out’; even by ‘writing your congressman’, tacitly accuses S*i talkers of killing 3,000 911 victims for (oil, Israel, personal glory. empire aggrandizement … take your pick). They are (must be) as insane as Hitler and the Nazis who slaughtered 6.000.000 Jews. “Obsessed and Deranged” Frank Rich’s Sunday 2.28 NYTimes term for those sympathetic to Joe Stack III’s “kamikaze mission” -- the tax protestor who flew his explosive-loaded plane into an Austin, Texas office building that housed the IRS Feb. 18. “Anybody who thinks like Stack is a threat to do what he did” is the poisoned derivative. They might even win a media name for the disability: Stackers*, to go with Birthers*, Truthers*, Tea-baggers*, in today’s mainstream street parlance. Anti-semitism*, “homophobia*, racism*, pro-life*, evil* H1N1 vax* in yesterday’s. Lump these together and add: Evangelicals*, Christian right*, Zionism*, Israel*, Roman Catholic*, together with “anti*-s”. .=> (this comprises, as a mental content) a set, or group of Tokens distributed by text over entirely separate, independently organized domains of application (like metaphor), throughout the common cognitive discourse. The group*, itself, has an inner organization, built around/into/by the grammar of S*i. It* could be called “The Axis of Hate”

Metphysical Metaphor for Poison Token cluster: Black Widow Spider Web.


It* functions* like a black widow’s spider web. The textual, true-false links (factual; objective-causal, or subjective-grammatical) supply Tokenspace lines for distributing venom whenever a true (“pro-“) or false (“anti-“) S*i derivative shows up on the grid. The Black Widow Spider crawls around looking for those who are exposing themselves to danger by admitting one or the other. (=> Medusa, pulling your leg*, putting you on*, pulling the wool over your eyes* (<=fron Sufism; “suf” is wool), pulling your leg*: enticing soul danger danger by body allurements)


****
(… footnote: These are marks of projective behavior, accompanied by reversal of adult-child positions of consciousness. Projection-reversal is Lloyd deMause’s apt term for what happens when an adult regresses to identification with their ‘inner child’, treating an actual child as a punishing adult. Paradigm: A distraught mother screaming “You want to kill me, don’t you?”, while waving a butcher knife over the head of her squaling, shitty, kicking 3 year old kid. See Part 3.)


Final note on poisoned reversal

Poisoned discourse is illustrated by laws ostensibly against hate speech, when the protected speech in question itself projects an underlying attitude of hate (e.g., twisting expression of white, straight, Southern male pride of ancestry into “bigotry against minorities”. And this, just snipped from a UK site: “I may not be racist, but I sure am tired of answering the question.” Regression of the psychosemiotic level of common group discourse to exchanging conscious content related only to the poison cluster is the agenda of those hooked by the Poison Cluster pod. The token in every committed, sincere link can be turned, substituted for/by an exact opposite, so that predication on it* is always simultaneously predication on what it is intended to reverse. This depicts the degenerate form of logically degraded discourse: ~S*^S* (the token of a sign negating its text.) This form defines the principle of logical necessity as the reverse of its demonstrable impossibility. It can also be seen

peace, goodwill, understanding, cooperation, unity

******

AFTER GROUP DISCOUSE HAS BEEN POISONED

-All disagreement is total; none can be resolved w/o shifting S*i levels, where the opposites will break out again.

-There are two kinds of people participating in every “we” conversation: those predicating consciously or unconsciously on the poison tokens



Part 3.