Dear All,
The following article once again reveals the fact that the Zionist power centres within America are crumbling & far from Israel being seen as a strategic asset, it is being viewed more as a liability, an albatross as it were, to the US.
A message here for our Indian elite as well. Also do note the statement issued by the European Union On Palestine, thus attached as they are very positive.
"The Pew poll not only reveals that the overwhelming majority, two-thirds of the members of this elite foreign policy institution, believes that the United States has gone overboard in favoring Israel, it doesn't consider Israel to have have much importance to the US in the first place."
"(1) That on a list of countries that will be the "more important as America's allies and partners" in the future, just 4 per cent included Israel which placed it in a tie with South Korea and far behinf China, 58 per cent, India, 55 per cent, Brazil,37 per cent, the EU, 19 per cent, Russia, 17 per cent, Japan, 16 per cent, the UK and Turkey, 10 per cent, Germany, 9 per cent, Mexico, 8 per cent, Canada, Indonesia, Australia and France at 5 per cent. CFR voters were allowed to make up to seven selections.(Q19)"
Read On.
Regards
Feroze
What the U.S. Elite Really Thinks About Israel
By JEFFREY BLANKFORT
The Council on Foreign Relations is always near the top of the Left's list of bogeymen that stand accused of pulling the strings of US foreign policy. It is right up there with the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, right? Wrong. If that was the case, those arguing that US support for Israel is based on it being a "strategic asset" will have a hard time explaining a Pew Research Center survey on America's Place in the World, taken of 642 CFR members between October 2 and November 16. The Pew poll not only reveals that the overwhelming majority, two-thirds of the members of this elite foreign policy institution, believes that the United States has gone overboard in favoring Israel, it doesn't consider Israel to have have much importance to the US in the first place.
What can be concluded from the answers to questions that dealt with the Israel-Palestine conflict is that the general public forms its opinions from what it hears and reads in the mainstream media which are largely biased towards Israel while CFR members have greater access to as well as interest in obtaining more accurate information and are less susceptible to pro-Israel propaganda. That apparently not a single US newspaper saw fit to report on the opinions of CFR members, under those circumstances, is not surprising. The evidence:
(1) That on a list of countries that will be the "more important as America's allies and partners" in the future, just 4 per cent included Israel which placed it in a tie with South Korea and far behinf China, 58 per cent, India, 55 per cent, Brazil,37 per cent, the EU, 19 per cent, Russia, 17 per cent, Japan, 16 per cent, the UK and Turkey, 10 per cent, Germany, 9 per cent, Mexico, 8 per cent, Canada, Indonesia, Australia and France at 5 per cent. CFR voters were allowed to make up to seven selections.(Q19)
(2) When asked which countries would be less important to the US, Israel, at 9 per cent was behind 22 countries including Canada and Mexico and in the region Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.(Q20)
(3) What was particularly revealing is that "in the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians," only 26 per cent of the CFR sided with Israel, compared with 51 per cent of 2000 members of the general public who were polled over the same period. While but 16 per cent of CFR members sided with the Palestinians compared to 12 per cent of the public, 41 per cent of the CFRers sided with "both equally" as opposed to 4 per cent of the public. Supporting neither was 12 per cent of the CFR and 14 per cent of the public. (Q33)
(4) That the CFR has not had a major hand in making US Israel-Palestine policy nor is it in agreement with those who did is strikingly revealed by the response of its members when asked their opinion of US Middle East policies. The problem, according to 67 per cent of CFR members (as compared to 30 per cent of the public) is that the US favored Israeli too much, while only 2 per cent (as opposed to 15 per cent of the public) believed that US policy overly favored the Palestinians.. Twenty-four percent of the CFR believed US policy "struck the right balance" as did 29 per cent of the public. (Q34)
(5) The overwhelming majority of CFR members, 69 per cent, think that Pres.Obama is "striking the right balance" between the Israelis and Palestinians as compared with a slim majority, 51 per cent of the public. Thirteen percent of the CFR believes that Obama is "favoring Israel too much," as compared with 7 per cent of the public, while 12 per cent thinks he is siding with the Palestinians, a position taken by 16 per cent of the public. (Q35)
Regarding Iran, one detects the same gap between the CFR and the public. Whereas a 64 per cent-34 per cent majority of the polled CFR members see Iran as a major threat to US interests, compared with a 72-20 per cent per cent majority of the public, only 33 per cent of the CFR would support an attack on Iran should it get a nuclear weapon as contrasted with 63 per cent of the public. (Q7)
The percentages are almost reversed when it comes to Pakistan with 63 per cent of the CFR supporting US military action were "extremists...poised to take over Pakistan," whereas only 51 per cent of the public would approve such a move. (Q24). This is another indication of the success of Israel's porte-paroles in the mainstream media in building up the Iran threat while downplaying the potential threats to the stabilty of nuclear-armed Pakistan. The entire Pew survey can be viewed here:
http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/569.pdfJeffrey Blankfort is a long-time pro-Palestinian activist and a contributor to The Politics of Anti-Semitism. He an be contacted at jblankfort@earthlink.net
--------------------------------------------------------
- The Council reiterates that settlements, the separation barrier where built on occupied land, demolition of homes and evictions are illegal under international law, and that they constitute an obstacle to peace and threaten to make a two-state solution impossible.
- The Council urges Israel to immediately end all settlement activities, in East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank and including natural growth; to dismantle all outposts erected since March 2001; to reopen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem in accordance with the Roadmap, and cease all discriminatory treatment of Palestinians in East Jerusalem.
- As regard the status of Jerusalem, the Council reaffirmed that the has never recognized the annexation of East Jerusalem and that it will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders [i.e. the Armistice Line], including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties, and states that a way must be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states.
- As regards Gaza, the Council, while recognizing Israel's legitimate security needs, calls for full respect for international humanitarian law and implementation of UNSCR 1860, and reiterates its calls for an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza.
The Conclusion is available in full at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/111829.pdf
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment