Famed research journalist Thierry Meyssanwrites in Voltairenet (article available in Spanish, French and Italian - originally found in Eutsi in Spanish language) on the Gaza genocide. He does give a somewhat different viewpoint of what I have been reading so far, so guess it's worth a mention.
Meissan argues that some of the appointments of the new US President B. Obama have been recieved with dislike in Tel Aviv and that the attack against Gaza, coordinated with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, is an attempt to force Obama's hand.
It's been denounced (Petras called him the "first Jewish President") that Obama is strongly supported by the Israel Lobby, not just this last year but through all his political career. But Obama's base, the politically relevant one, does not just include Zionists but also realistic generals who are (common sense) tired of getting the US foreign policy dictated almost to the letter by Tel Aviv and who think it's about time that the inverse becomes true: that Tel Aviv is forced to make concessions in order to get peace and stability in the so-called Middle East. Some among these realists are even asking to include Syria and Iran in the Western bloc and, in order to achieve that, propose making reality the Oslo accords and giving Golan Heights back to Syria.
All this, Meyssan argues, would mean the end of the Zionist project of unlimited genocidal expansion, leaving it stuck in the 1967 borders (i.e. undoing all the de-facto gains of the last decades) and making it just another ally among many western-friendly West Asian countries. It's even possible it would be forced to get rid of its arsenal of WMD.
Meanwhile the radical Zionists, whose most important figure in the current US government is Hillary Clinton (a convert to Christian Zionism), want to consolidate the apartheid system normalizing the Israeli bantustan system for the Palestinians, who would get a formal recognition as autonomous Israeli protectorate.
In September and October 2008, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt held meetings in Cairo where they agreed that, in case of uncertainty for the Zionist project in Washington D.C., Israel would attack Gaza with Saudi financing, while Egypt would infiltrate paramilitary troops in the territory.
The Obama cabinet has ended being a mixture of tendencies: the state department is fully under Zionist control and the cabinet chief, Rahm Emmanuel, is an Israeli citizen (who with all lkehood informs Tel Aviv in real time of what happens in Washington) but the National Security Council and the ministry of defense is in the hands of Atlantist realists who are nowadays worried about uncontrolled Israeli activities causing disruption in the oil and gas supplies to the USA and Europe.
This one has been the first Israeli "war" (rather a masacre) not financed by the USA (though I can't help thinking on where did Madoff's money end) but by Saudi Arabia. This neo-medieval theocracy is worried about any kind of Islamic Fundamentalism it cannot control (read Hamas) and wants to supress it by any means at hand.
A defeat of this plot would leave Israel very much weakened anyhow, especially after two recent major defeats (Lebanon and Georgia).
On Europe, Meyssan just mentions the clear pro-Zionist partiality of Sarkozy and the typical arrogance exhibited by Tel Aviv with one of its greatest benefactors: the EU. But I can't help to consider wether this week's news of a trial by the Spanish Audiencia Nacional (political tribunal under full control of the Spanish government) against Israeli politicians and generals on massacres happened in 2002 doesn't mean that some European powers are maybe taking steps in prevision of Israel (or at least the Israeli hardliners) falling out of grace in Washington D.C. (and other capitals of the West). I seriously doubt that Spain (a middle sized power, certainly much richer than Israel but in serious economic trouble and seldom an independent player in international politics) would allow its pitbull judges to act against Israel (causing an important diplomatic row) if it was not intently moving piece in the international chessboard. This means probably that, while France is standing firmly by the Zionist bloc within NATO, Spain is showing its support for the Realist bloc instead.
In any case I have to say that this is the first independent analysis that puts any hopes in Obama and his team regarding the Zionist problem. Nearly everything else I have read basically understands that Obama is not just another Zionist US president but maybe the most boot-licking one of all. I wonder if Meyssan is blind or if he has actually found some discrepancies in Washington. Of all what I see, very few signs could support at the moment a turning point of the Atlantic Empire in regard to Israel.
But certainly the Realist bloc, if it actually exists, should have very great concerns regarding the absurdly problematic "clash of civilizations", fed basically by Israel and Saudi Arabia for their own goals (apparently opposed but efefctively in agreement). Meyssan is one of the persons that most strongly have denounced the 9/11 scam, so he must know all that. Maybe there is some real Realist bloc within the USA and NATO, that is extremely concerned that, without a change of policy regarding Israel, the farce could become true and actually challenge the Western interests in the region.
In any case it is still weak. And Obama's independent foreign policy is even weaker. I hold some hopes on this guy not just being another figurehead but a real Machiavellan "prince", i.e. a true statesman, but this hope is mostly based on astrology, not on real facts by the moment. Astrologically thinking, Obama could be even stronger than Putin, with whom he shares some traits, but we can't forget that the main weakness of a Leo is always his vanity.
We'll see. Meanwhile the people of Gaza and all Palestine continue being treated worse than cattle while the world governments remain outragingly silent. .