Friday, January 22, 2016

Israeli preference for ISIS suppressed by the media

Here is our letter to the New York Times concerning the failure of the newspaper to report the Israeli Defense Minister’s preference for the ISIS terrorist organizationas we informed you in this column yesterday:

To the Editor

Is there a reason why the Times has not reported the January 19 statement of Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon that he prefers that ISIS take over Syria, if it is a choice between ISIS and Iranian forces?

As you know, if ISIS were to conquer Syria, the Christian and Alawaite populations in that country would be nearly exterminated.

Why isn’t the Israeli Defense Minister’s preference for the ISIS terrorist organization news? 

Michael Hoffman


1 comment:


Of course the Israeli Defense Minister prefers ISIS to Iran. Big surprise.

Israel has been a major secret collaborator in creating and supporting ISIS.

It is a tiresome game that has been going on.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey - both low-key allies of Israel now for some years - are not doing work of which Israel disapproves.

Ever notice how ISIS never attacks Israel or Israeli interests, just makes the odd vague threat to maintain its credibility as a radical outfit? Of course, it is the same for Saudi Arabia and its interests, the Saudis being a paymaster who is never threatened.

Israel has become a kind of genuine nightmare in the Middle East, contributing to instability and destruction and death in every direction.

It is opposed to Iran only because Iran is potentially the Middle East's big player, the role it covets for itself.

All Israel’s rubbish about Iran’s existential threat is just that, rubbish.

Iran has never threatened Israel, but Israel has busied itself with threatening Iran regularly and even assassinating Iranians.

Indeed, modern Iran has never started a war with anyone, while Israel has attacked every neighbor that it has, some many times.

Israel is able to play this ugly game only from behind American protection, a rather cowardly position like the proverbial calling someone names from behind your mother’s skirts.

By the way, Obama has for the most part catered to Israel's unending and tiresome demands on many fronts, as has been the case for so many senior American politicians, Israel’s well-financed and coordinated lobby holding their public declarations of loyalty to ransom.

But in the one matter of not allowing war with Iran to be started, he has made himself the most hated American president in Israel's brief history, while doing one of the only genuinely worthwhile things of his presidency.