Richard Melson

December 2005

Muslims & Jews



Essay Number 1 by: Richard Melson

Date: November 30, 2003

Mr. Hirsch versus Hadji Murad in the Year 1904

In 1904, Joseph Conrad published his classic "Nostromo" and Tolstoy his "Hadji Murad".

"Nostromo" is set in the South American Republic of "Costaguana" and the basic story is one of political struggles in and around "Costaguana" getting entwined with mineral wars, in this case the struggle not for oil or sugar or diamonds, but for silver.

Hirsch the Jew is caught in a complex triangular struggle between Charles Gould, the Western silver magnate, Nostromo, the head of the dockworkers, and various generals and their factions and cabals. Hirsch is murdered in the vortex of imperial/local moves and countermoves.

Hadji Murad, Tolstoy’s Muslim creation, is caught in imperial/tribal struggles in the Caucasus with Chechens fighting Russian overlords (Chechnya-Russian struggles of today are part of this long fight). Hadji Murad is also murdered.

A central historical question of 1904-2004 is: How have the Jews (Hirsch) wound up in the role as neoconservatives, trying to take America into "superimperialism", engineer a clash of civilizations, bring about a Hirsch/Charles Gould anti-Arab, anti-Third World, anti-Moslem coalition against over a billion Hadji Murads?

What is the world system?

The world system refers to the coercion system and the image system that frames the money system: the US military, backed by Hollywood movies, maintaining a world economy, using the latest technical means. (electronic eavesdropping by the NSA, for example).

What do the Neoconservative/Zionist Jews Want at the world system level?

What the Netanyahu-Sharon/Perle-Feith grouping wants at the level of the whole sytem is:

1. Take a leftwing idea "permanent revolution" and modify it to mean "permanent hostility" against Arabs and Moslems and Third World aspirations.

2. In a "regime" of "permanent hostility, the key idea is: war is peace. One constantly attacks, creates new "facts on the ground" whether in Palestine or Iraq, maintains an aura of unanalyzability. Thus Netanyahu now wants to create a rival to the Suez Canal on the Israel side; Sharon hopes to create an America/Israel/India anti-Moslem "axis;" Israel’s nuclear-armed submarines are a veiled threat to Blair and Bush that they’re not going to risk London and Washington for Ramalllah; the Arabs and Moslem worlds are to be subjugated "forever" by Israel’s nuclear monopoly in the area, its endless ability to flummox and defy the UN, the US, and the whole world, and basically to make Israel Washington’s controller.

3. David Wurmser, the neo-con Zionist, Cheney’s new main advisor, one of the architects along with Perle and Feith of the Iraq War, believes that Arabs don’t really "deserve nation-states" and should be rolled back to tribal formations. This is a reincarnation of course of the Hitler "idea" for Poland and Czechoslovakia and even Russia.

4. To "flip over" the current "coercion" dimension of the world system, the US/EU, US/NATO, US/UN "security archictecture", to be replaced by an Israel/USA "new world order".

5. While points 1 through 4 above are explored, the creeping annexation of all 1967 Arab territories should go forward with a collapsible bantustan for the Palestinians as the worst-case scenario.

6. Create nuclear "suitcase bombs" and place them worldwide via Israeli agents…in other words, create a neo/Zionist nuclear "counterglobalization" system. In combination with Israel’s growing fleet of nuclear-armed submarines, the whole Third World can be subdued forever for "peanuts".

7. Conceal via tactical moves and "gentility tricks," the fact that Israel is now the world’s main "transnational crazy state".

Arabs and Moslems in the world system

The tasks of Arabs and Moslems are therefore:

1. To understand points 1 to 7 above clearly and unblinkingly.

2. Realize that they can only "take the ball away" from the neocon/Zionist by beating them at their own game.

3. This would mean world economic development as the new world order, as an alternative to "clash of civilizations."

4. In other words, an Arab/Moslem-led change in the world system, with the White House itself as the main ally in this "structural break".

5. The task is to capture the White House conceptually, replacing the neocon/Zionists.

December 1, 2003

Essay Number 2: Understanding This Era

Richard Melson

In the recent book KARL POLANYI IN VIENNA, Samir Amin, the Egyptian economist says:

"In the 1968-1971 period, the world economy entered a zone of crisis which crisis continues to this day..."

(Amin essay, "Relaunching Development")

We will accept this basic intuition and consider the present era to comprise the years 1968-2003 and beyond.

Since we are interested in the world system the global "arrangement" that contains the world economy as a component we would also add to other facts in the penumbra of the world economy: Britain left Aden in 1968 and the Gulf in 1971 (leaving the UAE behind) and this means that Samir Amin's 1968-1971 is part of a larger story: the departure of the Brits from the Middle East, leading to the subsequent arrival of the Americans as replacement If we posit an "Anglo-American macrohistorical pattern", we should see British imperial history as a prelude to an American echo. (No one reading about the Churchill/Gen. Maude invasions of Iraq (Mesopotamia) from 1917-1920 can fail to see the Bush/Rumsfeld analogue. Gassing Iraqis from British airplanes was Churchill's 1920 version of "shock and awe", say)

With this backdrop, let us then ask directly: what is the fundamental nature of the present era, 1968-2003?

To answer this question as simply as possible but not simpler, we would say:

The world system is undergoing some kind of "rotational correction" and faces two historical gateways:



The first embodies the Thatcherite doctrine that the poor have too much money; the second wants to re-colonize the Third World by force and undo the era of decolonization from Ghana 1957 through Hong King 1997, replacing it with re-colonization.

Both of these doctriness to be blunt were created by Jews for Anglo-American "ruling groups".

Milton Friedman and the recently deceased Peter Bauer were the Jews behind neo-liberal theory. This governs West/Third World economic relations today and harkens back to 19th century Gladstonian policies. (we see again the Anglo-American patterning here) . The so-called Washington Consensus of free enterprise/free trade everywhere pushes this doctrine on the whole world.

The neo-Conservative thrust derives from other Jews: Kristol father and son, Zionist pressure groups, Feith, Wolfowitz, Perle, Wattenberg, etc. This line surrounds anti-Arab, anti-Moslem, anti-Third World programs with a "gift wrapping" of Wilsonian idealism.

The neo-conservatives are actually radical Jewish revolutionaries who plan to overturn the current world order/world system and replace it with a US/Israel binary coalition that will conquer and subjugate the Third World, with the thwarting of the Palestinians as the main symbol of this. The demonization of Arafat is part of this desire to delegitimate and marginalize Third World aspirations to nationhood, sovereignity, and development. For these revolutionaries, a Jerusalem (ethically cleansed of Palestinians) should direct Washington.

In other words, neo-conservatism is ultimately an attempted Jewish activist coup in the world system which attempts to redirect world history in a Zionist direction.

America would dominate the world and the Jews (in Israel and Washington) would dominate America and hence America would implement Jewish visions for the future.

How did this situation arise in the first place? After all, many groups would love to hold the steering wheel of Washington policy in their grasp Why these neo-liberal and neo-con Jews?

The simplest possible answer is this: the ruling wasps (Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld) visualize these Jewish groups as a kind of Manhattan Project II, a Teller/Oppenheimer secret weapon grouping, that will give them "new weapons" in the fight for American hegemony and their own domination. The Jews are seen as an internal think tank of futurologists that bolster ruling groups.

In the case of the UK, Thatcher's advisors during her years 1979-1990 were all neo-liberal Jews: Keith Joseph, Nigel Lawson, David Young, etc. Thatcher and these Jewish advisors called Third World proposals for a New International Economic Order "a letter to Santa Claus" and pushed neo-liberal doctrines under the slogan of TINA ("there is no alternative").

Their other slogan was of course, "there is properly speaking no such thing as society".

This slogan implies of course, "there is no global society".

In other words: simply stated, the 1970's lead to a semi-collapse of Anglo-American self-confidence. It is this historical panic which lead to a farming out of policy to Jews, whether neo-liberal or neo-conservative.

The world faces these two Jewish-designed "gateways to the future" because traditional ruling groups in America and England fear the future.

The assignment for Moslems worldwide becomes: take the ball away from these Jews and promote the "rotational correction" in the world system in the direction of Third World development and the replacement of Jewish worldviews by Moslem ones.


December 2, 2003

Israelization of Washington Policy:

Neo-con Zionist "gentility" techniques.

The fundamental technique of the Neo-con Zionists is to cloak what their real intentions are—namely the overthrow of the current world system to be replaced by an Israel-American dominated "new world order"—in progressive gentility, benevolence and altruism.

Spokesmen like Bernard Lewis of Princeton (Cheney’s Arab and Muslim expert), Richard Perle of the Defense Policy Board, Doug Feith, Undersecretary to Wolfowitz, always speak in dulcet tones about Arab and Muslim prospects, about how they admire Arabs and Muslims, always speaking "more in sorrow than in anger."

Consider the Feldman/Feith team:

The Noah Feldman/Feith Example of "Gentility Techniques"

Noah Feldman, a professor at the New York University School of Law, has been named senior advisor for constitutional law in the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) for post-war Iraq.

Feldman is an Orthodox Jew. Born in Boston in 1970, he earned a D.Phil. in Islamic thought from Oxford University in 1994.

He serves as Professor since 2001 and is considered, by those who find it useful to do so, as the country’s leading expert on "Islam and democracy".

Feldman is also the author of After Jihad: America and the Struggle for Islamic Democracy (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, April 2003), in which he proposes that Islam and democracy are viable, and that the West — particularly the United States — should work to bring it about.

This is a perfect "setup" for Feith and company. An Orthodox Jewish expert with impeccable academic credentials sees no conflict between Islam and democracy. This means Feldman is the perfect constitutional expert for Arab and Muslim countries and it’s all carried out in a benign, sage-like, scholarly environment so nobody grasps the true nature of what Feith wants. If Islam and democracy were incompatible, then how could one hope to transform the Arab and Muslim worlds…it’s precisely that experts like Feldman believe the US begin the process of bringing democracy to these "wonderful people", that gives Feith and the neo-con Zionists the "global can-opener" they seek.

They can "take the high ground" and use "progressive" pro-Islam/pro-Arab arguments, cloaked in a well meaning, "genteel"presentation, to topple governments at will "because the Arabs and Muslims, being wonderful, deserve so much more".

What the neo-con Zionist have done—this is one of their fundamental tricks—is to paint themselves as avuncular reformers, humanitarian activists trying to help the world but what they really want is:

  1. as many dead Arabs and Muslims as possible. Ben Wattenberg expressed this "demographic anxiety" in his book "The Birth Dearth".

  2. Turmoil on a world scale to break up the current world system in favor of a "new world order" led by an Israel-American partnership. (the Iraq War was to be step one in this march). Turmoil also leads to enhanced weapons sales for Israel.

  3. Maximum square miles for Israel. Maximum number of Jews in Israel. (Jackson-Vanik Amendment of 1974 to be strengthened to force Russia to "cough up" remaining Jews for Israel", to settle in the Territories, of course.

  4. Death for the Roadmap, Abdullah Plan, etc. Jordan-is-Palestine.

  5. Make "big bucks" on the side via Richard Perle’s companies like Trireme partners.

Points 1-5 above are concealed behind "gentility tricks" and scholastic giftwrappings.

An ally like Feldman also empowers Feith to rev up the "Israelization of Iraq". This is temporarily on hold but the idea is that their man, Ahmad Chalabi will come to power and recognize Israel and also rebuild the Mosul to Haifa oil pipeline.

Another "angle of attack" by Feith and the neo-cons is in the oil area, expressed by the non-Jewish neo-con ally James Woolsey:

"The wealth produced by oil underlies the power of the three totalitarian movements in the Middle East that have chosen to make war on us: the ruling Iraqi Baathists and Iranian mullahs, and al Qaeda, which was spawned by Saudi money. [..] We are at war. We should start by asking what we can do, as soon as possible, to undercut our enemies' power. Other considerations should now follow, not lead. [..] If we do not act now, we will leave major levers over our fate in the hands of regimes that have attacked us or have fallen under the sway of fanatics who spread hatred of the U.S., and indeed of freedom itself. [..] For all of them, their power derives from their oil. It is time to break their sword."

R. James Woolsey, CIA Director, 1993-95, Wall Street Journal, September 18, 2002

One of the main organizations trying to achieve this neo-con goal of getting the oil wealth away from Arabs and Muslims is the IAGS:

Institute for the Analysis of Global Security
P.O. Box 2837
Washington DC 20013

Their current favorite book is:

Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Its Soul for Saudi Crude

by Robert Baer

One of their main "top guns" is the Professor Eliot Cohen, Wolfowitz’s close "buddy":

Eliot Cohen is Professor of Strategic Studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of the Johns Hopkins University. He graduated Harvard College in 1977 in government (political science) and received his Ph.D. there in the same subject in 1982. From 1982 to 1985 he was Assistant Professor of Government at Harvard, and Assistant Dean of Harvard College. In 1985 he became a member of the Strategy Department of the United States Naval War College. In February 1990 he joined the Policy Planning Staff of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he worked on a range of issues, including force planning and regional conflict, and in July of that year he was appointed professor of strategic studies at SAIS.

Eliot Cohen authored

Supreme Command: Soldiers, Statesmen, and Leadership in Wartime

(Free Press, 2002,)

This is the same person who helped finalize Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. In the same way that Netanyahu’s book "Terrorism: How the West Can Win" was "assigned" to Ronald Reagan in 1986, Eliot Cohen’s "Supreme Command" was a "homework assignment" for Bush before the Iraq War. Conversations about this book between Bush and Cohen helped clinch Bush’s war decision.

The neo-con Zionist trick is:  frame everything in terms of nurturant and reformist gentility and then show Bush that he also need not suffer from the problem his dad called mockingly, "the vision thing".

Thus the neo-con Zionists are basically extremely skilled "political psychiatrists".

Muslims & Jews

December 14, 2005