Skip navigation

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY MARY DEJEVSKY IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“We have to accept that Assad will win in Syria”

Here’s what that should say, were the piece not the trashy propaganda that it, in fact, is, “We have to accept that the legitimate government of Syria is going to win”

Further, the legitimate government is going to win over a terrible mob of mercenary killers dumped into the country by Saudi Arabia and Turkey, thugs supplied and recruited and paid by those two countries plus the United States, Qatar, and Israel with additional help from Britain and France.

Well, thank God that something awful is going to end up right for once.

Assad’s is a pretty decent government supported by many factions in Syria, including Christians.

And note that his army has stood by him for five years of this deliberately-induced horror, despite many efforts at bribes and inducements from outside.

It says a lot for the respect he commands in much of the Syrian population.

The Neocons will not be happy, but so what?

They are in fact as close to Nazis as we have in the Western World today.

Never mind your “deplorable” Trump supporters, never mind the ‘alt-right,” only the Neocons have started, against all international norms and treaties, wars of aggression, committing murder on a truly massive scale.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RINF

 

For a while and on a number of occasions, when I went to the Sputnik site, I’ve received one of those warning pages from Google about a possibly unsafe site.

To proceed, you must press the “unsafe” link.

Well, that’s just the shabbiest crap.

If it is any consolation, they do the same thing at times for Yahoo mail.

So, it is both political opponents and competitors against whom they use this dirty trick.

Boy, long gone is Google’s original motto of “do no harm.”

But then the motto was in the days before Google became a massive, secret extension of the CIA.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RINF

 

It really is interesting with the number around 200.

It was a similar figure that old drunk Joe McCarthy, as he worked feverishly to revive a declining political career with explosive unproved claims, threw around as the number of Communists said to be infesting the State Department.

Ah, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Well, I am sorry he’s recalled this tired old Republican idea of the 1980s.

It was one that went on and on in droning tedium, never going anywhere. I always understood it as a sign of a party with no real purpose trying to spark attention.

But Trump is a man who just bubbles over with concepts, good and bad, and most of the bubbles are allowed to harmlessly pop.

Of course, recalling this is also an effective way to float a notion and see how the public reacts, which will not be well for this one, at least with the great majority.

The dumber Republicans tried for years and got nowhere.

This is also a way to keep minority portions of his base happy with little periodic noises they like to hear.

I cannot believe he really means what he hurriedly typed at seven in the morning.

________________________

 

Response to another reader’s comment:

Many simply do not understand that controversy and troubles around the American flag stem from the fact that it is no longer just an innocent national symbol.

For great numbers of people in the world, the same flag some Americans fly affectionately from a pole on their porch, represents aggression and bloodshed and grave injustice. The parallel with the Union Jack in 1776 is rough, although Britain’s imperial forces never killed and destroyed on the scale of America’s today.

I know that is hard for many naively-faithful American Patriot types to accept – thinking as they do that America is the fount of all that’s good and fair on the planet – but it is simply the truth.

There has not been a single American war since WWII that was about self-defense or, indeed, about any matter of principle beyond America’s self-assumed right to tell others what to do, and with deadly force. Although there was plenty of empty speechifying with slogans and empty words accompanying each bloody event.

Millions, literally millions, have died at America’s hands in Vietnam, Cambodia, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and in a host of other places.

And they all died, with others wounded and vast amounts of property destroyed, at the hands of American forces waving the flag and mouthing slogans about democracy and rights. It is an appalling record.

All of them died for no good reason except that the American establishment wanted it that way. Now, wasn’t that kind of arrogance and indifference to people a major factor in Trump’s victory? Many Americans are simply sick of it because the establishment treats them the same way.

And how bitterly ironic it all is because America seems incapable of running its own affairs – from its titanic debts to its shabby third-world inner-cities.

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN SPUTNIK

 

As a Canadian, I am sorry for this.

But, in a way, such acts by our government are just public declarations of its weakness.

Canada is effectively a colony of the United States, and only a rare Canadian leader is able to work against America’s stupid pressures.

Such a leader was Pierre Trudeau, late father of our current Prime Minister.

Justin, for all his charm and apparent decency, is simply not made of the same stuff as his father.

But, then again, American demands today are being made by a Neocon-led government at such a pace and intensity that even Justin’s father would find himself in difficulty.

The world’s bully just seems to generate unhappiness in whatever it touches.

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY ZLATA RODIONOVA IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Brexit pound slump causes Christmas pudding prices to jump 21%”

Well, the author has done it.

I didn’t think it was possible, but Zlata Rodionova has managed to write the most ridiculous post-Brexit vote piece I have come across.

Christmas pudding prices, my God.

I think she should look into the price of coal because that is what Independent editors deserve in their stockings for publishing such utter rubbish.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RUSSIA INSIDER

 

A catastrophe is precisely what Ms Merkel’s policies have been.

She will not be treated kindly by history, both for having supported America’s savagery in the Middle East and for doing bizarre things to deal with the domestic effects of that very savagery.

She fancies herself a decent, enlightened, democratic person yet supports the likes of Erdogan and mass killer Obama.

She has also been a serious supplier of modern weapons to Israel which continues with its horrible occupation, oppression, and theft of other people’s property.

You cannot have it both ways, although clearly Ms Merkel thinks you can.

That utter confusion of thought and principles is why the American establishment has taken a beating from Trump. Obama and Hillary think much like Merkel.

I am always a believer in what you actually do in international relations, not in the words you use.

Obama has never stopped blubbering about democracy and rights while killing hundreds of thousands of people and running a major extra-legal operation to make people “disappear.”

He is a total failure as a man of principle and a leader, and Ms Merkel very much resembles him, even down to the empty words about principles she writes in her letter to Trump.

 “Germany and America are united by shared values: through democracy, freedom, respect for the right and dignity of every individual, irrespective of origin, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation or political attitude. On the basis of these values, I would like to offer you a close cooperation between the governments of our countries.”

 No clear-thinking person can accept those words from that leader as anything but an example hypocritical establishment “boilerplate” – the kind of phony stuff just rejected by the American people.

Trump will not do everything right, I know, but Merkel has done nothing right, just like her admired friend, Obama.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

I’m sure this article is more of the usual Independent anti-Trump crap.

But, in fact, it would be only right for this outrageous international criminal to be prosecuted in other jurisdictions.

There are dozens of justified examples, including the matter of thousands of dead women and their families in Libya and Syria.

But perhaps the most touching example was the Clinton Foundation work in Haiti after the earthquake.

$30 million was collected by the Foundation for relief in that horror which killed about a quarter of a million people, but it just literally disappeared.

The Foundation’s own books say it spent $3 million, and they do not even specify on what.

Chartered air flights? Luxury hotel accommodation? Fees and expenses for photographers to do come-on advertising brochure pictures?

We do know there was no help of any substance to the poor people despite $30 million in the coffers.

Somehow, too, Chelsea, a woman who has never done an honest day’s work in her life, came up with $3 million for her wedding, almost as though she were a Royal.

Of course, Chelsea served as executive on the Clinton Foundation and, one way or another, that’s where the money likely came from.

A truly disgusting bunch, the Clintons.

America’s Ceausescus.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

This is just a total fraud.

Anyone even hinting at doing anything around Israel’s stolen land and resources in the Golan would get attacked, full stop.

The issue here is not ISIS and any imagined attack on Israel.

ISIS has never attacked Israel, and indeed Israel has secretly supported both ISIS and Al Nusrah for years.

ISIS and Al Nusrah are Saudi-endowed entities, and today’s Saudi Arabia does nothing to displease Israel.

They are indeed fast friends behind the scenes sharing many common interests, including a dislike of democracy in any neighboring governments and indeed at home.

Both also have little respect for human rights, despite public relations statements to the contrary.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

This sounds remarkably like some Republican “family values” drivel of the 1980s.

With God on her side, she can do no wrong, I guess.

So, does that mean she had a sign from Above to appoint Boris Johnson?

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY KATIE FORSTER IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

But a scam is exactly what it is.

Interesting, isn’t it, that the initiative did not come from the blind ambition of Hillary? Jill Stein’s tiny percentage of votes could not possibly change enough to matter.

The Green Party’s Jill Stein is being used as a stalking horse here.

Yes, that’s the same Jill Stein who during the campaign said that Trump’s thinking on foreign policy was preferable to Hillary’s aggressiveness.

Who is responsible behind the scenes?

George Soros, Hillary’s great intimate – as we saw in the Wiki-Leaks material, he regularly felt entitled to intimate access and to advise her on positions to take – and big financier and a billionaire dedicated to throwing his weight around in America and abroad.

His fake NGOs abroad, such as the phony White Helmets in Syria, have been directly associated with CIA activity in its efforts to re-make the face of the world.

His American NGOs, such as MoveOn.org, are associated with the early efforts to disrupt, in the fashion of Nazi street thugs of the 1920s, Trump rallies with hired strong-arm tactics.

A study has been made of the pattern of the supposed thousands of individual contributions to this recount cause.

The donations, in fact, come in neat little dollops with regularity, following a nice curve, the pattern of a computer bot operation – not of thousands of individuals acting.

So, Mr. Soros is able to contribute several million dollars – nothing for him, he has given Hillary tens of millions in the past – for this destructive purpose without the public’s knowing it.

And Hillary of blind ambition gets a last, desperate try for what she has lusted after for decades, again without the public’s knowing anything.

I don’t know what is in it all for Jill Stein for taking the lead role in the play, but you can be certain something important has been promised.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RUSSIA INSIDER

 

As for American media, they are free, too.

Free, that is, to do as their very small number of large corporate owners dictate they should.

And I have yet to hear of a large American corporation which does not cooperate, hand in glove, with the government of the United States on a vast range of matters.

We saw the snowstorm of trash thrown at Trump by virtually every one of them, a relatively small version of what the last couple of years were like on the subject of President Putin.

And we are all aware of the stories of the ways Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon and other (non-media) giants cooperate fully with the CIA and NSA as well as how they worked in many surreptitious ways against Trump during the election.

Anyone who believes in the integrity of corporate journalism is simply someone not worth paying any attention to. Such ignorance and naivete disqualify anything they might say.

I think still the best statement ever made on American journalism is the one that says that to have a free press, you have to own one.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN SPUTNIK

 

“Castro to Go Down in History as the Only One to Hold Out Against US Empire”

Absolutely.

He was extraordinarily brave and dedicated to his purpose, whether you agree with everything he did or not.

What a time it was, both frightening at times and exciting. I recall as a very young man what an exciting figure he was. Lots of young Americans admired him then.

The United States government threw just about everything they had – short of open war, which in those days it seemed to still have the desire to uphold appearances about – against him.

He survived in large part owing to the great loyalty of most of his supporters, a fact which is powerful testimony to the man’s leadership.

There is the suggestion, from what we know of some of the CIA plots, that there was an insider in Castro’s retinue who was secretly working with the CIA. We don’t know his name, and, for all we know, he was in fact a counterintelligence figure working for Castro.

Despite many efforts, the forces after Castro in the United States failed in attempt after attempt to kill him, but then they went after John Kennedy, who had more or less guaranteed Castro’s future to end the Cuban Missile Crisis, and killed him.

They even deliberately faked up the trail leading to Kennedy’s assassination with clues and hints which were intended to link Castro to the assassination, thus warranting an American invasion of Cuba after all.

It sure wasn’t poor little old Oswald, a man who actually liked Kennedy, doing any of that.

Who else still is not completely clear, but the crazed, fanatical Cuban refugees, trained and supplied by the CIA, along with some fanatical CIA guys working on the file have always seemed the strongest candidates to me.

Money for the plot undoubtedly came from the Mafia who had been working with the CIA in this dirty business and also were disillusioned with Kennedy.

That is of course the untold story of the Kennedy Assassination, an event which punctuates Castro’s early years much like a giant historical exclamation point.

 

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY RUPERT CORNWELL IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“A hero or a tyrant? Fidel Castro’s legacy will echo long beyond his death”

Would the silly author of this silly piece please name one great historical figure who was not complicated, complex, and viewed quite differently by different groups?

Winston Churchill? My God, the man used machine guns on third-world people, regarded the British Empire as sacred, called opponents names, thought nothing of giving one group’s property to another group, made insider deals with hugely influential men, expressed contempt for ordinary voters on many occasions, admired Stalin in secret, plus many other delightful behaviors.

I do not say these things lightly, having read a number of biographies and a great deal of Churchill’s own writing.

Only naive people think great figures are either black or white. Very naive people, the kind who should not even be writing articles about one.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Really, this is an idiotic column.

America’s way of electing governments has never been what could be called democratic.

Indeed, the Founders went out of their way to call the new political entity a “republic” rather than a democracy. And the word “republic” is one of the most undefined terms in political science, meaning little more than government by some kind of representatives, however selected, and the absence of a monarch.

America has had many minority presidents, including the very George W Bush you mention, in 2000.

It is because of the Electoral College system set up by the Founders in the Constitution. These were mostly men who did not trust democracy and wanted safety valves against popular votes disturbing the privileges and wealth of the upper class.

Until 1913, the Senate, that most powerful body in the American government, was an appointed body for the same reason that the President is not directly elected by the people. All that grand pageant through the Nineteenth Century of American history, involving many famous and infamous names of Senators, was in fact about appointed officials, a fact few Americans even know.

The Electoral College system of election could be changed, but the Founders deliberately made it exceedingly difficult to change the Constitution they were creating. An amendment would require approval of the Senate, the House of Representatives, the President, and a vote in all fifty states. That’s a lot of effort and political capital spent to correct something that only pops up to irritate people once in a few decades.

The matter has never generated the intense public and political momentum necessary. Hillary Clinton, after Bush’s minority win in 2000, said it should be abolished, but, as with so many things Hillary said, she never did much about it.

What your column boils down to is a statement something like Trump was elected exactly according to the rules for American elections with an added sentiment, owing to ignorance of history and the rules, of “Gee, that ain’t democratic.”

No, it is not, but then neither is America.

Added thoughts.

As a reader below has pointed out, does the rising Clinton total of popular vote include the 3 million non-citizens who are said to have voted, completely illegally?

This behavior was definitely a form of vote fraud, and it was encouraged and enabled by Obama and Clinton in a kind of burst of faux populism put on just to keep their losing cause going.

And further, academic studies have shown, Hillary in fact stole the nomination of her party from Sanders. It was a long and shameless set of behaviors, and things just do not come more anti-democratic than that.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO A COLUMN IN RUSSIA INSIDER

 

Putin’s appearance is just what you might expect from an intelligent, extremely capable man who has done his very best to reason with a man who has done nothing but create chaos and disorder for eight years.

Obama is one of the biggest disappointments of my adult lifetime. A man who seemed bright and hopeful and a little out of the mainstream has done nothing more than sit like a ventriloquist’s dummy on the knee of the most savage group in America and mouth platitudes while they murdered hundreds of thousands of people.

He leaves office having done almost nothing worthwhile at home or abroad, leaving a shambles of world affairs.

Yet he still enjoys some popularity, and I think it is because of his boyish smile (seen far less though than years ago), his baritone voice, and the general residual astonishment that a black man succeed in rising to the highest office. It is also because the general public in America is so abysmally poorly informed of what America actually does abroad, and why.

Imagine a black man who never did one worthwhile thing for his own people? A Peace Prize winner who has done nothing but generate war and death on a grand scale? A man who leaves office with his last big effort having been running around the country at the public’s expense trying to promote the most corrupt and vicious candidate for President in memory? An arrogant man who never stops preaching his narrow concepts to others with his finger pointed up right under their noses?

An utter failure. An international shame.

The pictures are found here:

http://russia-insider.com/en/last-handshake-caption-contest-final-photo-obama-and-putin-together/ri17708

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

I don’t think he ever had the proverbial “snowball’s chance in hell,” and I think this truly widely-despised man well knows it.

After all, he is genuinely evil, but he is clever like many truly evil men. Such a predatory animal knows when the odds are against him for fresh kill.

It is only the hack editors at The Independent and The Guardian who have promoted for some time this notion of Blair returning to politics as a kind of Don Quixote of Brexit.

But their judgment we may all judge for ourselves in the stream, the literal raging flood, of complete rubbish they have published day-after-day in the last year on the subjects Corbyn, Brexit, Clinton, and Trump.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY VICTOR KOTSEV IN RUSSIA INSIDER

 

“Peacenik” is far too strong a word. I can’t imagine anyone really thinking this flag-waving American Oligarch is going to be anything remotely like that.

What thoughtful people do see is a man whose words suggest he is open to diminution of America’s intense and blood-soaked aggression of recent years, and if that proves true, the world will be a better place.

A Peace Prize winner and a wannabe first woman President have left the American military-security establishment totally raging out of control, threatening and killing people in many lands.

I don’t know whether their behavior was sheer incompetence in leadership or shared viciousness. It doesn’t really matter.

What we do have a chance for some hard-headed sense and decency in policy, much as we see with President Putin.

The American imperial reality is not going to disappear any time soon, but that does not mean it has to act like a savage bully at all times in all places.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE POSTED IN SPUTNIK

 

Just disgusting. We can all hope it goes no farther into some kind of action.

We literally live in a world turned upside down in which war is peace and lies are truth.

It was in fact some of these very governments which supported and covered for ISIS in recent years.

This kind of stunt is just a way of criminalizing free speech and yet one more pointless attack on Russia.

Of course, it all reflects the influence of Obama’s truly sick government.

At the same time, this utterly failed man uses his remaining time to talk up the fake idea of fake news in the alternate press and doing something about it.

Of course, the reality is that we have had absolutely nothing but fake news from the “credible” press for the entire era of the Neocon Wars.

 

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RINF

 

The members of the Commons Committee each need to get a life.

Jailing mentally-unbalanced people who pin some medals on?

What would be next, going after boys who dress up as policemen or firemen?

God, government can be an idiotic waste of resources at times.

Actually, it is the members of such committees who should face jail.

Jail for wasting the public’s time and resources while attacking helpless people with problems.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Harry is not just a scrounger, he is pretty much a useless non-event of a human being.

His record of behaviors and statements is appalling, and that’s based just on what we know, what hasn’t been kept secret.

He undoubtedly received the worst of the Spencer (Diana’s family) genes, a family which has had many troubled and troubling people in its history.

Harry is the best argument there is for getting rid of the Monarchy after Elizabeth hangs up her crown.

He is a publicly-supported non-entity with virtually no ethics or purpose.

Monarchy is an outdated and slightly ridiculous institution whose cost to the public just keeps rising. Sentimentality around it is mostly uninformed of its actual costs and lack of genuine purpose.

Believing the Monarch serves as a kind of check on the powers of Parliament in the 21st century is nothing more than belief in a rather silly fable.

No modern democratic government would tolerate a Royal veto of anything, and, as we saw in the case of Tony Blair’s determined, dishonest campaign to drag Britain into a vast war crime – about as darkly serious a thing as a government can ever do – the Monarch made not a whit of difference.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RINF

 

“Vindication Of Sanders”

Sorry, but this is an extremely superficial view.

Bernie proved himself a poor prospect for President when he utterly capitulated to Hillary, abandoning the hopes and enthusiasm of millions of followers.

She embodied everything that he rightly said was wrong, and he still went ahead, campaigning for this murderous and utterly corrupt person.

It was Bernie’s moment on the world stage, and he blew it, completely.

Well, if he could not stand up in private to Hillary and her flacks, he certainly could never hope to stand up to generals and admirals and high-level security people and the representatives of massive special interests.

Bernie’s behavior added strong evidence in support of the idea that a person may prove an excellent campaigner and a failure at actually doing anything worthwhile after campaigning.

Of course, Barack Obama had already provided convincing evidence for the truth of the idea.

________________________________________

Response to another reader’s comment about Bernie moving from New York to safe white Vermont:

There is truth in what you say.

There was a huge movement of urban whites out of the cities in the 1960s.

It was called White Flight, and I witnessed it first-hand in Chicago of the mid-1960s.

It remains one of America’s most profound and unresolvable realities.

The very high violent crime rates among black males is the main driving force, not skin color.

The stats are unmistakable with young black men committing violent crimes at something on the order of 8 times that of others, and we find exactly the same thing in places as diverse as South Africa or the Caribbean.

In fact, in recent years, we have seen successful, middle-class American blacks doing exactly the same thing. Leaving urban areas, on a smaller scale, smaller because there are simply fewer of them.

There is much hypocrisy around this matter amongst genuine American liberals like Bernie.

And hypocrisy doesn’t solve problems.

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN YOURNEWSWIRE

 

I think Kennedy is right only in small part. The pipeline is indeed something the establishment would like to create and that Assad has opposed.

But war in Syria, like Iraq, is part of a grand plan to re-mold the Middle East into Israel’s liking and secure its hegemony there.

Politicians like Kennedy would never discuss it for fear of offending America’s powerful Israel Lobby.

A kind of giant cordon sanitaire has been abuilding around Israel for years, and at an immense cost in human lives.

We have comments over the years from high American officials suggesting support for the concept.

Condi Rice once brutally called the screams of the hundreds of thousands killed in Iraq something to the effect of the screams of a new-born Middle East.

George Bush once candidly remarked on how much more Sharon demanded in the Middle East, saying something like I already invaded Iraq for him and how much more does he want?

In Iraq, American forces directly invaded, blatant aggression, and to the shock of much of the world.

In Libya and Syria and Yemen, surrogates – mercenaries and fanatics – were used with secret support, a very dirty business.

John Chuckman

COMMENT TO AN ARTICLE BY OLIVIA BLAIR IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

Perhaps, the same way he explained to them about the Easter Bunny?

Really, Independent editors, I don’t see how you could possibly come up with a more ingratiatingly stupid piece of propaganda.

——————————————————–

Response to another reader’s comment calling Obama a scam artist of the highest quality:

It’s all in the big smile and the baritone voice.

I actually welcomed this man’s first election warmly, believing he represented some real change.

I resented reports early on that Bill Clinton had said in private that on talking with Obama “he just did not have it (the skills for being President).”

But it wasn’t long before I understood.

He quickly proved not only a failure, a complete failure, but a horribly hypocritical failure.

And his level of arrogance is convincing evidence for mental illness.

By the way, great superficial charm combined with murderous lack of empathy are the hallmarks of a psychopath.

Readers may enjoy this image of extreme arrogance:

http://chuckmangrotesques.blogspot.ca/2016/10/john-chuckman-grotesque-obama-best.html

 

 

 

 

 

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY JONATHAN COOK IN INTIFADA PALESTINE

 

There is little doubt that Arafat was murdered, and by the agency of Mossad.

About that time, Israel had reached a huge head of steam over Arafat. He wasn’t permitted to attend even Christmas services, and then his compound was partly wrecked by Israeli tanks in the clearest personal threat.

Sharon had a meeting with George Bush, and he was reported by a few sources as asking Bush if he could be released from Israel’s promise to not harm Arafat.

Bush, always the insipid and obsequious fool with Sharon, was reported as having readily agreed. It wasn’t a great deal of time after that that Arafat died.

The Israelis may well have employed a dissident Palestinian to do the actual job, something which is a common practice with outfits like the CIA, who for example once used a reputed Castro insider to try killing Castro.

But please, there are only a tiny number of sources on the planet for radioactive Polonium, and one of them is Israel’s nuclear industry.

I think it more than likely here with his suggestions about who killed Arafat that the unelected Abbas wants to point the finger at a political rival rather than reveal any truth.

Abbas is pretty much a sad creature of Israel’s. He is allowed, every once in a while, to do or say some seemingly challenging thing to reinforce his “creds” with his own people, but, in the end, Israel is quietly happy with him.

Of course, Israel would prefer there were no Palestinian government at all and, indeed, no Palestinians, but so long as it must keep up pretenses, Abbas is their man.

Readers may just have noticed that Israel never likes democratic leaders in its neighborhood. It likes unelected strongmen, while pretending otherwise, Arab “irrationality” and penchant for dictatorship being great propaganda phony talking points with the outside world for “the Mideast’s only democracy.”

That is why it hates Hamas. That was why it hated the elected Morsi government in Egypt and undoubtedly had it put on a CIA list for restorative action, restorative of military dictatorship.

And that is why it such great secret ally of the Saudi Princes, with whom it shares so many interests, especially an aversion to human rights and genuine democracy as well as a preference for only one kind of people living in each country.