This article is the Preamble to my paper Palestine: The Struggle Forward, which can be read here . That paper looked at the battle of two fundamentalisms, between indoctrination borne of self-interests on the one hand, and the sense of fairness and justice among those in mankind who share a common moral compass regardless of their race, cast, color, or creed, on the other. A moral compass which is straightforwardly based on the Biblical Golden Rule “Do unto others as you have others do unto you”, and is one which is innately recognized by all ordinary sentient humanity as the touchstone of moral commonsense. It is the primal differentiator which separates us from animals without their capacity for abstract thought. Even the most heinous of criminals among mankind, do not fail to recognize the applicability of this Golden Rule to their ownselves in their godfather's quest for primacy. Their exercise of hegemony is not based on not having the moral commonsense, but rather, despite knowing it all too well, being flushed with the unassailable hubris natural to the distemper of absolute power, getting away with it – as demonstrated in this famous proclamation of Adolf Hitler, reported by William Shirer, the American war correspondent in Berlin, in his diary on the eve of World War II:
“Hitler knew the answer well. Had he not the week before on his Bavarian mountaintop promised the generals that he would 'give a propagandist reason for starting the war' and admonished them not to 'mind whether it was plausible or not'? 'The victor', he had told them, 'will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not the right that matters, but victory.'”
The Struggle Forward argues that the only rational way to carry the struggle for Palestine forward is in a strategic division of labor. Those on ground zero having no choice in the matter, to continue-on with waging that battle of their lives by the existential necessity of survival against the incessant onslaughts of the indoctrinated political robots and trigger-pulling foot-soldiers of Zionism exercising their fanatical jihad for Jewish Lebensraum. Those in the Diaspora having all the choice and freedom of action in the comforts of the West, rather than waste their time bemoaning Al Nakba every year, to instead, go straight for the jugular of the real prime-movers behind that Zionist quest for Lebensraum. That, their to-date 62 years of ineffective struggle can only acquire potency, some measure of efficacy, if the Palestinians shrewdly recognized that the Israel Project is intimately tied to the globalists' agenda for the primacy of a “Zion that will light up all the world” in a one-world government. And they harnessed that brazen fact to reframe their struggle as the common global struggle of mankind directed principally against not the errand boys in Zionistan, but against the common global enemy of all mankind, the prime-movers.
Known and very popular cialis coupon which gives all the chance to receive a discount for a preparation which has to be available and exactly cialis coupons has been found in the distant room of this big house about which wood-grouses in the houses tell.
As reported in the Washington Post, if “there might be a legal entitlement to be a jerk”, most assuredly there will be legal entitlement to be a non-conformist, i.e., an independent thinker:
'Today's DSM defines "oppositional defiant disorder" as a pattern of "negativistic, defiant, disobedient and hostile behavior toward authority figures." Symptoms include "often loses temper," "often deliberately annoys people" or "is often touchy." DSM omits this symptom: "is a teenager."
This DSM defines as "personality disorders" attributes that once were considered character flaws. "Antisocial personality disorder" is "a pervasive pattern of disregard for . . . the rights of others . . . callous, cynical . . . an inflated and arrogant self-appraisal." "Histrionic personality disorder" is "excessive emotionality and attention-seeking." "Narcissistic personality disorder" involves "grandiosity, need for admiration . . . boastful and pretentious." And so on.
If every character blemish or emotional turbulence is a "disorder" akin to a physical disability, legal accommodations are mandatory. Under federal law, "disabilities" include any "mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities"; "mental impairments" include "emotional or mental illness." So there might be a legal entitlement to be a jerk. (See above, "antisocial personality disorder.")' -- George F. Will, The Washington Post, February 28, 2010, Handbook suggests that deviations from 'normality' are disorders
Well, we already know that Orwellian conformance and Orwellian re-semantification of language is on-going, as also examined in Joseph Massad's Al-Ahram Weekly article 'The Language of Zionism' here, and in this scribe's response to The Israel Lobby's Global Propaganda Manual here.  The aforementioned diabolics to label non-conformists as suffering from “disorders” is merely the next phase of it. Soon, all un-favorableness towards Zion, just like all critical questioning of Holocaust already is in many parts of the world, might be illegal, or as the above portends, be deemed a mental illness. In either case, a good reason to be enjoying state hospitality, perhaps even in Room 101. 
Let's begin by looking at the maps of Palestine and the end result of 62 years of compromises while peering down the triple-barrel gun of Zionism: massive money, massive power, and continuous massive control of imperial superpowers. The effect of this triple-barrel gun of Zionism is is empirically depicted in the following maps of ground realities:
(The latest Palestinian Uncle Tom for the Nobel Peace Prize:
Dr. Mustafa Barghouti
Click on this navigable map of One Palestine, courtesy of Plands.org
I commence this exploration by framing the question forensically: today as a Muslim in the world, I am a reviled entity in the West. I bear the brunt of the same anti-Semitic fulminations from the pulpits, thrones, and pedestals of “our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both” – in the potent words of the mighty Zionist Svengali, the “leading Western scholar of Islam”, Bernard Lewis – as the Jews absorbed for two millennia in Christendom up to as late as 62 years ago, the day of Al Nakba. But look at my dire predicament: I can't get in to see anyone in power to plead to them to give me back my Palestine, and my Iraq, and to stop the military and covert assaults on my Pakistan, and on my Iran, and to stop inducing the “birth-pangs of a New Middle East”.
How could the Jews have done it: got the imperial powers to grant them the Balfour Declaration from a severely weakened imperial power upon whom the sun had never set at the end of World War I after it had simultaneously defeated two other rival powers in Europe, the German Wiermach Republic which was the legatee of the mighty Austria-Hungarian empire, and the Ottoman Empire which was the legatee of over 13 centuries of Muslim empires; followed by the bipartisan vote from the two most Cold Warring factions at the end of World War II, the United States and the USSR, in the United Nations; unless the Jews had already acquired the triple-barrel gun of Zionism? Who acquired it and wielded it on behalf of Zionism? After every major World War, Zionistan came a step closer to realization. Who participated in the peace talks at the end of each world war which gave Zionistan its piece meal recognition? Who created the entity of the United Nations to create legal sanction by an arbitrary supra-national global authority pushed by the victors of World War II, and whose very first acts were to sanction partitions, specifically of Palestine and Pakistan? After World War III, the Global Cold War of yesteryear, the Zionist state even emerged as the top three among the world's superpowers. How could that have possibly happened? And after World War IV, this Global War on Terror inferno that we, the generation Caught Between Two Ages, are being privileged to live through without any significant comprehension of the forces which drive it, will surely culminate in the “Zion that will light up all the world.”
As a practicing engineer – used to examining complex systems in order to build them – turned social scientist, puzzled by this bizarre empiricism of the slaughter of the goy in massive numbers and the systematic destruction of their power-base, with the Jews successively coming out on top after each slaughter-cycle in such a short span, I decided to probe deeper. This paper is the result of my progressively refined research into this question since that very day of infamy, September 11, 2001. Since the day when I had decided to dump all a priori pre-suppositions, and all pied-pipers, and had curled up with William Shirer's Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, and Hitler's Mein Kampf, to attempt to comprehend the Nazi's self-inflicted Operation Canned Goods as a pretext for their war of German Lebensraum. I have, by now, studied countless historical narratives to understand current affairs and empirical matters always cloaked in deception. My comprehension today is layered upon facts uncovered by many a rational, un-afraid detectives who has tread this path before me.
But it is not mere facts which create perspectives. Although, no doubt, facts must be built upon in order to be empirical in one's analysis. In an age when “deception is the state of mind and the mind of state” (James Jesus Ingleton, former Director of counter intelligence in the CIA during whose watch all the momentous political assassinations of 1960s transpired); when power decides what is fact and what is recorded as fact in its primary documentation and the popular Press, which are subsequently used by others down the chain of narrators echoing what was by fiat deemed to be fact, as absolute fact, without being cognizant of that very fact of fiat; when the enactment of puppetshows is construed as displaying “facts”, and recorded as such by historians; facts by themselves are meaningless in such a landscape when “waging war by way of deception” upon the public is the norm rather than the exception.
So, for instance, is it a fact that '19 Muslim Jihadis' rammed hijacked airplanes into two tall buildings bringing both of them down into their own footprint (watch wtc1, wtc2), bringing a third tall building down into its own footprint a few hours later without even hitting it (watch wtc7)?  In this example, the scientific observation that three very tall buildings comprising millions of tons of steel exploded into powder and/or collapsed into their own footprint at near free-fall speed, is an unarguable empirical fact. And the only fact. The rest, who dunnit, how it was done, and why it was done, as officially recorded in the current affairs books and the Press, are assertions by the fiat of power using its control of the narrative, i.e., the Mighty Wurlitzer, as examined here.  The official narratives of today are the absolute facts of the historians of tomorrow with no minority report on the official record. Popular dissenting voices of course are 'conspiracy theories', examined here,  shortly to be medically diagnosed as victims of delusions suffering from mental illnesses for which medical and legal groundwork is now being laid.
As George Orwell shrewdly but accurately observed in the opening of his seminal prognostications in “1984”:
“Who controls the past, controls the future; who controls the present, controls the past”
Therefore, empirically, control of the narrative of history, as of current affairs, has been the imperative of all empires. It is a tool as old as hegemony, as old as mankind. Only fools, and imperial scholars in the service of empire, regardless of their garb, ignore it.
Ergo, it follows that the purported facts of history, as well as of current affairs, have to be treated as being more akin to clues, at times false clues and red herrings as in a crime scene, rather than as statements of facts. Therefore, the most rational model for understanding history and its linkages to current affairs, is the forensic one. Like the forensic eye of a crime detective, such as Agatha Christie's famous character Hercule Poirot, pondering upon the interconnections of clues, statements of purported eyewitnesses, drawing deductions, making logical inferences, and using new methods for uncovering unknown clues not visible to the naked eye in the visible light spectrum, such as employing ultraviolet and infrared regions of the spectrum to see what the naked eye can't perceive – all part and parcel of the forensics employed for apprehending a convoluted crime, solving a puzzle.
Thus, studying history and current affairs is like studying a crime scene or solving a puzzle. Its path is almost like the weaving of the many horizontal and vertical threads on a loom to fashion a carpet, or knit a Jacquard. That fashions a perspective from the underlying clues borne of empiricism. Weaving many perspectives from the same empirical elements, just like weaving many carpets from the same colored threads, is possible. And just like some detectives are plain wrong, and one right in identifying the real criminal, the same challenges beset the study of history. To find that right one master criminal, or the right perspective which explains the engagement of power and its narrative, surrounded tous azimuth by an endless trail of false clues, patsies taking the fall, and lies turned into sacred truths.
To the extent that a perspective is empirical, cohesive, is able to coherently resolve the riddles of power and its infestations of the mind, it cannot be refuted by mere assertions, threats, and calumny. It can stand in a court of law on its own merit, provided of course, it isn't a kangaroo court administering the sovereign's justice, a Military Tribunal administering the victor's justice, or a tournament of justice run by the Queen of Hearts from Alice in Wonderland. The definition of a crime, is always the fiat of sovereigns, such as one day a terrorist, the next day a Noble Peace Prize winner (like Israel's late prime minister Menachem Begin). As even argued by Justice Vinson of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1951:
“Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” (Cited in Palestine: The Struggle Forward, op. cit.)
Still, the vestiges of the “semantic strait-jacket” have left a few crucial loop holes in modernity. Before they all disappear altogether from the uber-moral landscape of secular humanism, one can harness the same cracks and lacunae used by power to oppress the world to its diktats: legalism. Afterwards, of course, when there is no recourse left from absolute tyranny, it is always either perpetual slavery, or perpetual revolt and warfare, for no peace processes can ever lead to freeing sheep from the hectoring hegemons' habit of mutton eating!
One such legal crack still existent in the dusty old law books, is, interestingly, this definition of “conspiracy”:
“In law, agreement of two or more persons to commit a criminal or otherwise unlawful act. At common law, the crime of conspiracy was committed with the making of the agreement, but present-day statutes require an overt step by a conspirator to further the conspiracy. Other controversial aspects of conspiracy laws include the modification of the rules of evidence and the potential for a dragnet. A statement of a conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy is admissible against all conspirators, even if the statement includes damaging references to another conspirator, and often even if it violates the rules against hearsay evidence. The conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence. Any conspirator is guilty of any substantive crime committed by any other conspirator in furtherance of the enterprise. It is a federal crime to conspire to commit any activity prohibited by federal statute, whether or not Congress imposed criminal sanctions on the activity itself.” (Columbia Encyclopedia, quoted in: Some Dare Call it Conspiracy! Are you among them? here )
My contribution to creating the forensic perspective on current affairs cannot be deemed very original, because, in the light of clear knowledge and forming the clear picture of the elephant shitting-trumpeting in broad daylight, it is only unveiling what is already in broad daylight. The blind of course can't ever see, daylight or not being moot. What can the blind ever perceive of an elephant, by feeling its deadly stomp upon them? Only something very large, and very heavy.
I do not intend to bring sight to the blind – not a Jesus, nor a miracle worker am I. I intend however, to lay the seeds to effectively counter this grotesque elephant using its own primary tool – political science, which it wields through its triple-barrel gun. To germinate, to cultivate, and to harvest, however is no more one man's job than executing on the Zionist's plan has been a one-man job. Using the same political science being used against us, we must fashion our own antidote to their triple-barrel gun. That fashioning does not require the majority of the public to be sighted, nor for them to believe what I believe, as Morpheus gallantly put it to the Council in the underground “Zion” in the Hollywood production: Matrix, the Revolution.
This paper is addressed to the tiny minority of thinking and morally-motivated peoples on planet earth, who still harbor the moral commonsense of The Golden Rule as a categorical imperative, who do not hold themselves to be uber alles, but who, almost all of them with only few notable exceptions, are inadvertently being led by their own emotionalism, by glamorous fools and false-leaders among them, and who have become the victims of their own myopic world-view which they haven't put to the forensic test of empiricism.
Thinking is a difficult business. Even those who can think, are often either too lazy to indulge in its luxury of actually exercising their grey-matter, often imagining that some other prominent stalwart with “scholar” stamped on his or her forehead has done due diligence on the matter on their behalf, or, are plagued by the following truism:
“Man is naturally competitive, acquisitive, and, in a greater or less degree, pugnacious. When the Press tells him that so-and-so is his enemy, a whole set of instincts in him responds to the suggestion. It is natural to most men to suppose that they have enemies and to find a certain fulfillment of their nature when they embark upon a contest. What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index to his desires – desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts [or worldview], he will scrutinize it closely, and unless [and at times even when] the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance with his instincts [or worldview], he will accept it even on the slenderest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way, and much of what is currently believed in international affairs is no better then myth.” (Bertrand Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 1919, page 147)
The construction of these myths and false beliefs in international affairs, as further explained by Philip D. Zelikow in the 1997-98 report of the “Terrorism Study Group” which accurately predicted the chain reaction of reaction-response cycle to any ‘Catastrophic Terrorism’, is predicated entirely upon the 'Public Assumptions' which Shape Views of History:
“Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community. The sources for such presumptions are both personal (from direct experience) and vicarious (from books, movies, and myths).” (Cited in: A Note on the Mighty Wurlitzer, op. cit.)
This tremendous insight into the mind of man was also not lost on Adolf Hitler. In Mein Kampf, Hitler accurately recognized it:
“Journalistic circles in particular like to describe the press as a 'great power' in the state. As a matter of fact, its importance really is immense. It cannot be overestimated, for the press really continues education in adulthood. Its readers, by and large, can be divided into three groups:
First, into those who believe everything they read; second, into those who have ceased to believe anything; third, into the minds which critically examine what they read, and judge accordingly.
Numerically, the first group is by far the largest. It consists of the great mass of the people and consequently represents the simplest-minded part of the nation. It cannot be listed in terms of professions, but at most in general degrees of intelligence.
To it belong all those who have neither been born nor trained to think independently, and who partly from incapacity and partly from incompetence believe everything that is set before them in black and white. To them also belongs the type of lazybones who could perfectly well think, but from sheer mental laziness seizes gratefully on everything that someone else has thought, with the modest assumption that the someone else has exerted himself considerably.
Now, with all these types, who constitute the great masses, the influence of the press will be enormous.
They are not able or willing themselves to examine what is set before them, and as a result their whole attitude toward all the problems of the day can be reduced almost exclusively to the outside influence of others. ...
Today, when the ballot of the masses decides, the chief weight lies with the most numerous group, and this is the first: the mob of the simple or credulous.” (Mein Kampf, pages 240-242)
Hitler credited the Anglophiles for their propaganda lessons:
“On the other hand, British and American war propaganda was psychologically efficient. By picturing the Germans to their own people as Barbarians and Huns, they were preparing their soldiers for the horrors of war and safeguarding them against illusions. ...
From the enemy, however, a fund of valuable knowledge could be gained by those who kept their eyes open, whose powers of perception had not yet become sclerotic, and who during four-and-a-half years had to experience the perpetual flood of enemy propaganda.
The worst of all was that our people did not understand the very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda; namely, a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with. ...
The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood. Its notions are never partly this and partly that. English propaganda especially understood this in a marvellous way and put what they understood into practice. They allowed no half-measures which might have given rise to some doubt.
Proof of how brilliantly they understood that the feeling of the masses is something primitive was shown in their policy of publishing tales of horror and outrages which fitted in with the real horrors of the time, thereby cleverly and ruthlessly preparing the ground for moral solidarity at the front, even in times of great defeats. Further, the way in which they pilloried the German enemy as solely responsible for the war--which was a brutal and absolute falsehood--and the way in which they proclaimed his guilt was excellently calculated to reach the masses, realizing that these are always extremist in their feelings. And thus it was that this atrocious lie was positively believed. ...
The success of any advertisement, whether of a business or political nature, depends on the consistency and perseverance with which it is employed.
In this respect also the propaganda organized by our enemies set us an excellent example. It confined itself to a few themes, which were meant exclusively for mass consumption, and it repeated these themes with untiring perseverance. Once these fundamental themes and the manner of placing them before the world were recognized as effective, they adhered to them without the slightest alteration for the whole duration of the War. At first all of it appeared to be idiotic in its impudent assertiveness. Later on it was looked upon as disturbing, but finally it was believed.
But in England they came to understand something further: namely, that the possibility of success in the use of this spiritual weapon consists in the mass employment of it, and that when employed in this way it brings full returns for the large expenses incurred.
In England propaganda was regarded as a weapon of the first order, whereas with us it represented the last hope of a livelihood for our unemployed politicians and a snug job for shirkers of the modest hero type. ...
I learned something that was important at that time, namely, to snatch from the hands of the enemy the weapons which he was using in his reply. I soon noticed that our adversaries, especially in the persons of those who led the discussion against us, were furnished with a definite repertoire of arguments out of which they took points against our claims which were being constantly repeated. The uniform character of this mode of procedure pointed to a systematic and unified training. And so we were able to recognize the incredible way in which the enemy's propagandists had been disciplined, and I am proud to-day that I discovered a means not only of making this propaganda ineffective but of beating the artificers of it at their own work. Two years later I was master of that art.” (Mein Kampf, Vol. 2, Chapter VI)
Hitler's teacher of course, inter alia, was Edward Bernays, the founder of “Public Relations”, who opened his own seminal 1928 book, Propaganda, which described the subliminal control of man and his behavior through manipulation of the subconscious, the 'irrational mind', with these portentous words:
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.” (Edward Bernays, Propaganda, page 1, also see A Note on the Mighty Wurlitzer, op. cit.)
The necessity of maintaining and manipulating a public's ignorance and perceptions through self-indulgences, through deliberately dumbing them down with bread and circuses, though wholly self-evident today, was already well thought out at the very dawn of the industrial age in the early eighteenth century. Bernard de Mandeville in his famous classic,The Fable of the Bees, observed:
“The economic well-being of the nation depends on the presence of a large number of men who are content to labor hard all day long. Because men are naturally lazy they will not work unless forced by necessity to do so.” (Bernard de Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees)
The philosophy espoused in The Fable of the Bees inspired Adam Smith to propose the pursuit of selfish industriousness for the overall common good – of course primarily of the ruling class with trickle-down economics, but that's just buried in the definition of common good. Patterned upon the bees collectively making that marvellous tasting honey, by each bee myopically staying busy in its own specialized micro-task, lies the entire edifice of modern civilization. This philosophy of selfish myopic industriousness for common good has been adopted to the high-tech age of modernity which requires rather specialized worker-bees, with the commensurate twist of creating educated morons with advanced university degrees who can very patriotically “United We Stand” for the common good while staying productively engaged in narrow specializations in the economy. Kept perpetually too busy, to either think independently even when capable of doing so, or to pursue knowledge outside of their narrow specializations by the sheer demands of having to pay their endless debt-bills in pursuit of their endless “American Dreams”, statecraft today relies on inflicting The Fable of the Bees upon man for its own proper functioning. Information today has been recast as knowledge, and parrots have been turned into learned savants.
A state of modern affairs which afflicts modern man quite democratically. We are, despite all the vast data on our fingertips in this Information Age, and all the sophistication of modern gadgetry, still living in the age of Jahiliya (ignorance)! This ignorance is by careful design in the industrious West, especially in the sole superpower, United States of America – as already examined by this scribe in Prisoners of the Cave here.  It is not just by the happenstance of knowledge explosion in modernity, as Zbigniew Brzezinski would have one believe. That, “the threat of intellectual fragmentation, posed by the gap between the pace in the expansion of knowledge and the rate of its assimilation”, is what causes general myopia in the Technetronic Era, leaving industrialized people, including the Palestinians in Diaspora who have moved to the West, quite ignorant of what matters to statecraft:
“The science explosion – the most rapidly expanding aspect of our entire reality, growing more rapidly than population, industry, and cities – intensifies, rather than reduces, these feelings of insecurity. It is simply impossible for the average citizen and even for men of intellect to assimilate and meaningfully organize the flow of knowledge for themselves. In every scientific field complaints are mounting that the torrential outpouring of published reports, scientific papers, and scholarly articles and the proliferation of professional journals make it impossible for individuals to avoid becoming either narrow gauged specialists or superficial generalists. ... The threat of intellectual fragmentation, posed by the gap between the pace in the expansion of knowledge and the rate of its assimilation, raises a perplexing question concerning the prospects for mankind's intellectual unity.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, page 15)
This paper assiduously endeavors to overcome those uncanny innate tendencies, and the hidden manipulations which exploit those innate tendencies, of projecting it “simply [being] impossible for the average citizen and even for men of intellect to assimilate and meaningfully organize the flow of knowledge for themselves”; of requiring experts to do it for the public; of learned people partaking in vicariously constructed myths and propaganda even to the point of condoning extreme violence when faced with any threat to one's world-view, whether real or imagined; as brilliantly captured by all the preceding empire builders, and amply in evidence since 911 when the most brilliant peoples gathered “United We Stand” just as in the Third Reich!
This paper consciously endeavors to overcome that deadly myopia against which Martin Luther King Jr., offered the following, and only prescription:
“In international conflicts the truth is hard to come by, because most nations are deceived about themselves. Rationalizations and the incessant search for scapegoats, are the psychological cataracts that blind us to our sins. But the day has passed for our superficial patriotism. He who lives with untruth lives in spiritual slavery. Freedom is still the bonus we receive for knowing the truth. 'Yee shall know the truth', says Jesus, 'and the truth shall set you free.'” (Martin Luther King Jr., 1967 speech at the Ebenezer Baptist Church)
And this paper does indeed overcome those “psychological cataracts” so diabolically cultivated and harvested by power, through its creation of multi-faceted Hegelian dialectics in order to seed the “high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification” that forms the core-underpinnings of “imperial mobilization”. This was coldly attested by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1996 The Grand Chessboard, and upon which is devilishly erected the entire house of cards of this Global War on Terror since the “Catastrophic Terrorism” of 911 – America's most longed for “new Pearl Harbor” to finally catalyze the process for the long planned transformation to Global Governance in a one-world government. A Catastrophic Terrorism for which the sole superpower had ostensibly prepared to protect itself against so assiduously throughout the post Cold War epoch which preceded it, just as it is now spending the post 911 epoch ostensibly protecting the Americans and its Western allies from the terrorists who did 911:
“But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is defense spending), and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization. ... More generally, cultural change in America may also be uncongenial to the sustained exercise abroad of genuinely imperial power. That exercise requires a high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification.” (Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, pages 36, 211-212)
Commensurately, in order to benefit from this paper and The Way Forward, or even to challenge it with any value added, the reader too must do the same. Understand that one is naturally beholden to one's world-view, no matter how profound or virtuous, which, one will naturally defend no matter what exposition with what evidence is set before one. Unless one consciously endeavors to overcome these “psychological cataracts” which tend to induce severe myopia, self-righteousness, and pathetic ignorance in the garb of lofty education, prestige, wealth, degrees, and applause, nothing new which is contrary to one's world-view, can ever seep in. Incestuous self-reinforcement is a state of normalcy not just at the White House in its Zionist decision making! This is entirely self-evident, but most tend to apply it to only others, not to oneself. It is always that other fellow! Know thy self in order to know the world, is more than just a cliché of the Sufis. It is a necessity for genuine learning in a modernity which subjects the public to immense forces of social engineering. Not an easy task to accomplish, for it's an on-going process to unlearn what has been spent a lifetime being taught and which has calcified in one's world-view.
Nevertheless, it is an essential process for genuine seekers of truth, for the moral harbingers of real change, including the Palestinian rebels themselves, in order for one to not go through life as a gullible patsy of power, as a virtuous moron rehearsing mainly the incantations of power while calling it dissent, as a programmed robot celebrating the scholarship of others, or as a likkha-parrha jahil (pretentious ignoramus with advanced academic degrees from IVY Leagues) leading other morons. Having suffered is not an automatic qualification for knowing what to do next. It requires careful thought, like any engineering project. And the test of thought is daily, constant, like morality, and one can't claim that Oh, I had thought in the 1960s, or “I was born with that thought”, and coast on that mileage! Saying that out loud sounds so bizarre, but it unfortunately captures the mindset of many a rebel today who prides himself on dissent – and follows the pied-pipers without analysis. The most thoughtful among this lot, in fact, have come up with a great excuse to not think: too much analysis leads to paralysis – “Just Do It”!
Do what? That's right, run on the treadmill laid out in front of one.
And one can see the results of exercises in “Just Do It” in the preceding maps of 62 years of dispossession, and where that's headed.
In my view, apart from all the other arguably good reasons, the primary reason the maps of Palestine presently look like this has been the failure to out-think and out-smart a far superior nemesis which primarily wages an uber-sophisticated war by way of deception strewn with crafty red herrings! See my analysis in Rescuing a Failed Struggle From Its Narratives – Response to Witness in Palestine, here.  And persisting in that way will only lead to the predicted outcome also shown in the maps!
It is a fallacy to look at the Jewish state in isolation to what's happening in the rest of the world, ignoring the unparalleled impetus towards Global Governance and global tyranny. The Zion has a singular role to play in this world, a role never enjoyed by Apartheid South Africa during the epoch in which it existed. The Jewish State will be able to maintain its Apartheid status indefinitely in the same measure as the world government will be able to maintain itself. In the words of Bertrand Russell:
“There is, it must be confessed, a psychological difficulty about a single world government. The chief source of social cohesion in the past, I repeat, has been war: the passions that inspire a feeling of unity are hate and fear. These depend upon the existence of an enemy, actual or potential. It seems to follow that a world government could only be kept in being by force, not by the spontaneous loyalty that now inspires a nation at war.” (Bertrand Russell, Impact of Science on Society,1951, page 37)
And we do empirically observe such a global display of monolithic force, police-states of common vintage rapidly descending like an “iron curtain” around the West.  If police-states can enslave billions of freedom loving Western peoples into the straight-jacket of tyranny, what's to practicably deter Zion to do it over several million? It is even far more experienced in its practice and is in fact, the teacher of others. World government and Zion share the same common prime-movers. Whereas, the cunning fallacy that an equitable binational state will be the natural outcome of the “onestate”, now that “two-state” is dead by the fiat of Zionist conquest, is being pushed by the new lauded scholarships to take over the critique of Israel from where Noam Chomsky left off in his now stale repertoire. As only an illustrative example, here  is the distinguished Professor John Mearsheimer, the author of the famous red herring critique of the ugly bulldog, The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, without identifying the prime-mover owners which empower its rabid bite:
“In the long run, however, Israel will not be able to maintain itself as an apartheid state. Like racist South Africa, it will eventually evolve into a democratic bi-national state whose politics will be dominated by the more numerous Palestinians. Of course, this means that Israel faces a bleak future as a Jewish state. Let me explain why. ....” (John Mearsheimer, The Future of Palestine: Righteous Jews vs. the New Afrikaners, speaking at The Palestine Center, Washington, D.C., 29 April 2010)
Bunch of bogus but believable explanations follow, starting with the first one: “For starters, the discrimination and repression that is the essence of apartheid will be increasingly visible to people all around the world” – as if, all the horrendous bombings and burning of Palestinian children haven't been visible to the world a plenty? Is Apartheid more atrocious than what the entire world witnessed in January 2009 in Gaza? See the absurdity of Mearsheimer's implied conjecture in that statement, that the people of the world in a pang of conscience will rush to Palestine's rescue, in From Genesis to Genocide in Palestine January 16, 2009 here. 
John Mearsheimer's main conjecture above, “In the long run, however, Israel will not be able to maintain itself as an apartheid state”, is sheer wishful thinking, if not outright nonsense, in no less a measure than Noam Chomsky's two-state solution has been a sheer red herring – and which mainly contributed in sewing the fait accompli for “onestate”, all-state, a mini Eretz Yisrael, today. The latter is now obvious to all and sundry by the grotesque realities on the ground. The former too will be just as obvious to celebrated pundits tomorrow, when it will sew the new fait accompli – no return of the Palestinian refugees to their home, and any Palestinians fortunate enough to survive expulsions and oppressions at ground zero, becoming the slumlords of the twenty-first century.
It is not a measure of thought to be able rehearse history like a parrot and draw shallow parallels to the present. It is, rather, in astutely preempting future history, in nullifying the acts of vile “history's actors” before they sew fait accompli, in shrewdly overcoming the diabolical war on public waged by way of deception by a thousand sayanim, as aptly captured in the pithy statement of George Bernard Shaw:
“We are made wise not by the recollections of our past, but by the responsibility for our future.”
Being independently thinking is a lonely business. None applauded Socrates, as one ought to remember while celebrating one's own truth tellers receiving awards, fat paychecks, and lucrative book sales. Gathering truly independent minded Socrates to focus on a common goal can only happen organically – not by celebrity appointment, or vote by democracy, or by book sales – when they each arrive at the same conclusion themselves.
In this interconnected world in which the prime-movers seek its primacy through its many incantations of visible power while staying safely hidden behind its errand boys, like Theodor Herzl's Der Judenstatd which rallied the Jews around Zionism, this paper endeavors to replace emotional sloganeering of the patriots of humanity, with political acumen rallied against the prime-movers. It replaces endless runs on the treadmills of inefficacy chasing a thousand different effects, with a focussed political goal to be measured in practicable results of actual baby-step achievements chasing the first cause, the prime-movers. The measurement is incremental success towards that goal, not wishful thinking, not applause of the mutton eaters, and not the shepherding of the butchers priming its flock for supporting the habit of mutton eaters. Just look at the preceding maps to realize the self-evident truth of this. Give me a lever long enough, and a place to rest it, and I can move the earth – that is an engineering problem, not a philosophical one. This is what the Zionist prime-movers accomplished through their triple-barrel gun – to give the devil its due – and this is what a new generation of fearless rebels among the beleaguered humanity must accomplish in order to rid ourselves of the deadly menace of the shitting-trumpeting-elephant trampling with impunity upon the entire world in broad daylight.
To remain afraid of the grotesque elephant is to court its shit in perpetual ignominy. To remain boldly unafraid of it with the moral courage and ingenuity of 'Mens et Manus' that no ubermensch can match despite their triple-barrel gun, is to avert future infamy for our progeny.
When those on ground Zero in Palestine daily exhibit this courage in a stride of existentialism, their brethren elsewhere bring only shame to themselves in their empty sloganeering and empty chest-thumping which puts to risk not an iota of hair on their head, never mind their waging a struggle of any measure of efficacy. This captures almost 99% of Palestinians in Diaspora, the majority among them being anguished bystanders like the rest of the world, too relieved to be out of the hell hole, too caught up in their daily grind to do anything but weep in silence; and a vocal minority among that lot remaining ineffectual narrators of the works of “history's actors”. This aspect of assiduously studying the shit left behind by “history's actors” as the perfect Machiavelli, is explained here.  Among the tiny exception of the remaining one percent Palestinians in Diaspora – like their counterpart among the tiny handful of the Jews who attended Herzl's first Zionist Congress in Basel Switzerland harboring a new vision for their Lebensraum – at least some among them must surely rise to that challenge to daily assert to themselves:
On this day I have reclaimed Palestine. If I were to proclaim it out loud, I'd be greeted with universal laughter. But in five years, surely in less than fifty, everyone will be able to return home. If only I knew how!
Well, as per the tautological promise of a Grander Power which surpasses the triple-gun of the Zionists, and which even Patrick Henry clearly understood,
“... Verily never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change it themselves.” (Holy Qur'an, 13:11)
Patrick Henry echoed that very belief when he laid the bold foundations of breaking-away from the chains of servitude:
“... Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.” (Patrick Henry, Speech March 23, 1775)
And so must the handful today, resoundingly echo the same sentiments:
“Gentlemen may cry, "Peace! Peace!" -- but there is no peace. ...
Our brethren are already in the field!
Why stand we here idle?
What is it that gentlemen wish?
What would they have?
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
Forbid it, Almighty God!
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” (Ibid.)
Here is my little take on how. I am afraid this is only the outline. In a nut-shell, First, conclusively identify the real enemy, the Golem which hides behind the Jews' momentous weight of 3000 years of history, but is no more a Jew of Moses than any other self-proclaimed Ashkenazi. Second, rip-out its heavily protected heart; or, administer a thousand lethal cuts and prevent each one from coagulating. Let's proceed to The Way Forward.
 George Orwell, “1984” http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5464625623984168940
Also see Sunstein, Cass R., Conspiracy Theories (January 15, 2008). Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03; U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199; U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387. PDF download from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585
Also see Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman, 1985; and article: The Destruction of American Education by Norman Livergood http://www.hermes-press.com/education_index.htm
Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act Part 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1P53wMbnsw
Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act Part 2 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjhNZjanX9k
Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act Part 3 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n2m-X7OIuY
Hal G. P. Colebatch, Thought police muscle up in Britain, April 21, 2009 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/thought-police-muscle-up-in-britain/story-e6frg6zo-1225700363959
 John Mearsheimer, The Future of Palestine: Righteous Jews vs. the New Afrikaners http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/display/ContentDetails/i/10418
by Zahir Ebrahim Written April 17, 2008 - Updated April 22, 2008. The abominable shared fates that unite Iran (“Bush and Iran,...
by Zahir Ebrahim Written April 26, 2008 - Revised May 2, 2008. Douglas J. Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, in his Hearing...
by Zahir Ebrahim March 31, 2007: I wrote this essay as the Preface to "Prisoners of the Cave" during 2003. That was four years ago....
by Zahir Ebrahim It appears that a majority of conscionable peoples opposed to their nation's war mongering for “imperial mobilization” in...
by Zahir Ebrahim Sunday April 06, 2008. It is à propos to begin this brief observation in 2008, on a cloudy Sunday morning while...
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites