Events in the world of "high politics" over the last week have been very revealing, and entertaining. The US-Israel 'special relationship' has, apparently, been souring for a while.

At the beginning of this year Israeli defence minister Moshe Yaalon accused John Kerry of being "obsessive and messianic" in his pursuit of a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians. A few months later Kerry warned Israel that it was in danger of becoming "an apartheid state". Israel is, of course, already a full-blown apartheid state with even the warmongering daughter of Israeli terrorists and now, Israeli Justice Minister, Tzipi Livni, complaining about segregated buses for Palestinians.

Two weeks ago the Obama administration warned that Israel risked alienating its "closest allies", and last week Yaalon was pointedly snubbed by senior administration officials during a visit to Washington. Then, several days ago, American-Israeli journalist and former Israeli prison guard, Jeffrey Goldberg, published an article in The Atlantic that cited an unnamed Obama official describing Netanyahu as a "chickenshit" in terms of the moribund Israel-Palestine 'peace process' and the alleged 'nuclear threat' from Iran.

Trouble in Psycho Paradise
"The thing about Bibi is, he's a chickenshit," said one official quoted by Goldberg. "The good thing about Netanyahu is that he's scared to launch wars. The bad thing about him is that he won't do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians or with the Sunni Arab states".
The Atlantic Magazine has previously been exposed as being one target of Israeli attempts to promote Israeli foreign policy objectives in the US media and disrupt US peace proposals in the Israel-Palestine conflict, which makes us wonder if these 'leaks' by Goldberg were not part of a plan to damage Netanyahu's reputation but rather to garner sympathy for Israel from the many 'Israel-firsters' in the US Congress and Senate and thereby thwart any efforts by the Obama administration to pressure Israel to stop building settlements on Palestinian land and torturing and murdering Palestinians. By way of deception is, after all, the motto of the Israeli Mossad.

Netanyahu responded by saying he was "under attack simply for defending Israel", but that he "cherished" Israel's relationship with the US, and throwing in an oblique reference to the JFK assassination:
"When there are pressures on Israel to concede its security, the easiest thing to do is to concede. You get a round of applause, ceremonies on grassy knolls, and then come the missiles and the tunnels.
The term "grassy knoll" has only one connotation in the USA, and Netanyahu certainly knows that. The idea that he was referring to the 1993 Oslo Accords that saw Arafat and Rabin shake hands on the White house lawn is a stretch since that was the White House lawn, not a 'grassy knoll'. Was the reference then a veiled threat to the Obama administration, that assassination of a US president who falls out with Israel is an option for the Israeli Mossad?

Given the extent to which the Israeli lobby and Israeli intel agencies have infiltrated many areas of American life, including political and military, the idea is certainly not implausible. But in the event that such an extreme plan of action were on the table, it's unlikely that Netanyahu, who is more or less just a functionary, would be in on it. As such, we can probably classify Netanyahu's 'grassy knoll' comment as an idle threat from someone who, like the vast majority of Americans, realise that JFK was killed by his 'own people' and not Lee Harvey Oswald.

Netanyahu's comment was followed a few days later by a provocative cartoon in the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz that depicted Netanyahu flying a plane into a skyscraper with a US flag on top.
The cartoonist, Amos Biderman, explained his intention on Twitter, writing:
"The message is that Bibi is arrogantly and wantonly destroying Israel's ties with the U.S. and leading us to a disaster on the scale of 9/11."
While Biderman's concerns are rather hysterical, the cartoon provided momentary grist for 9/11 investigators' mills, many of whom point to evidence for Israeli involvement in (or foreknowledge of) the 9/11 attacks.

King of the Jews

Weighing in to the polemic, Israel's far-right economics minister, Naftali Bennett, called for Washington to renounce the "chickenshit" comments and unwittingly revealed the true source of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
"If what was written [in The Atlantic] is true, then it appears the current administration plans to throw Israel under the bus.

"The prime minister is not a private person but the leader of the Jewish state and the whole Jewish world. Such severe insults towards the prime minister of Israel are hurtful to millions of Israeli citizens and Jews all over the world.
Bennett's comment reveals what the Jewish elite believe, and have believed for a long time: that the state of Israel is not really a 'democratic' state but, first and foremost, a Jewish state, and not just 'a Jewish state for a Jewish people' but a Jewish state for all Jewish people, wherever they may be. To understand the inappropriateness of such a concept, imagine if British Prime Minister David Cameron, or any British Prime Minister, was deemed to be the leader of the white, protestant, English people, and only those people, wherever they may be. And some people still wonder what the source of the Israeli-Palestinian problem is.

Psychopaths rule in a time of crisis

There's one final news story from today that ties into all of the above. The UK Independent reported that, in 1982, the British government carried out exercises to test how the country would cope after 300 megatons of nuclear bombs have been dropped within a 16-hour period. The exercises established that maintaining law and order would become increasingly difficult as police would be busy helping victims of the radiation fallout. "Players" in the war game would have been civil servants, police officers, fire fighters and members of the military. The files released by the National Archives revealed that a scientific officer in the Home Office, Jane Hogg, suggested that the police should recruit psychopaths to help restore order.
"It is generally accepted that around one per cent of the population are psychopaths. These are the people who could be expected to show no psychological effects in the communities which have suffered the severest losses." Ms Hogg suggested psychopaths would be "very good in crises" because "they have no feelings for others, nor moral code, and tend to be very intelligent and logical".
What is most interesting about this is that, back in 1982, at least some elements within the British government had a fairly keen understanding of the psychological profile of the psychopath and understood their 'usefulness' to maintaining 'law and order' in a time of national crisis or threat. The bombs never came of course, and, we presume, no psychopaths were ever consciously inducted into the national management structures.

Nevertheless, today we live under a pervasive threat of 'global terrorism', and are constantly reminded of it by politicians who appear to have "no feelings for others, nor moral code" and who have displayed "no psychological effects in communities which have suffered the severest losses" (like Iraq and Syria for example). Maybe what happened was that, when the Commies weren't up to providing the necessary threat for the rule of psychopaths, the psychopaths decided to create the threat themselves, thereby providing the perfect climate for the perpetuation of their rule.