By Gordon Duff and Press TV

—

However, in 2002, the film, We Were Soldiers, starring Mel Gibson, depicted the battle as a great American victory. The film is the only history of that era that stands, thus, America won when it lost. And Israel has learned much from that lesson.
The loss column
Israel has suffered a number of serious reverses of late. When Israel suffers, it loses face. Israel has found an interesting way of dealing with “losing face.” They lie. First, the losses:
• Israeli intelligence asset, Julian Assange, has been exposed, first by VT, then Zbigniew Brzezinski and now even much of the mainstream media who built his reputation we now know to be based on ‘chickenfeed’ and attacks on Islam.
• Israel’s choice for President of the United States, Mitt Romney, lost in a landslide election, despite hundreds of millions spent and President Obama being cited as the most “anti-Israeli” president in history. US Ambassador Stephens was killed in an attack in Libya that has been traced to planning within the Israel lobby and the Heritage Foundation.
• Senator Chuck Hagel was nominated and confirmed Secretary of Defense despite an all-out effort to smear him by the Israel lobby and their “assets” in Congress.
• Senator John Kerry, a good friend of Syria’s President Assad, takes over as Secretary of State.
• After being denied nomination as Secretary of State, longstanding Israeli enemy, Susan Rice has taken over as National Security Advisor despite relentless attacks by the Israel and neocon lobby.
• Syria sunk an Israeli Dolphin submarine in the Mediterranean on the night of May 4/5, 2013.
• Russia delivered a fully functional S 300 missile defense system to Syria in March 2012, a system that became fully operational within one hour.
• Syrian forces loyal to the government have been cleansing their nation of Israeli-backed Al Qaeda fighters.
• Egypt’s Morsi, a loyal ally of Israel, was removed from office for advocating war on behalf of Israel and abandoning democratic rule for police-state dictatorship.
Turning losses into wins
In the face of humiliation which would likely encourage those Israel has intimidated and bullied into slipping their shackles, Israel has turned to its own form of “holocaust revisionism” in order to turn “black to white:”
• Israel now openly trashes Assange, as seen in recent articles in Newsweek/Daily Beast. By turning against Assange, they are cashing in on their own failure. Then again, Edward Snowden is their creature, “Assange 2.0,” peddling ‘chickenfeed’ and hiding out from the “American oppressors.”
• Israel’s army of bloggers and pundits are now claiming Morsi was brought down by Obama on Israel’s orders. This is a “double dip.” Not only is Israel trading on their own miserable world standing to trash one of their blood enemies, President Obama, they now hope to divide and conquer by spreading wild conspiracy theories citing how “Morsi wasn’t pro-Israeli enough.” See who carries this absurd story. Put an “X” next to their name and remember.
• We could call it “Hagelcaust Denial.” Israel deals with an American Sectary of Defense who hates their guts by continually quoting him saying how much he loves Israel. Before his nomination, they continually quoted him saying how much he hates Israel. The love Israel says Hagel has for them seems, at least to the rest of us, as unrequited.
• In a recent Bloomberg story, it was claimed Secretary of State Kerry wanted to bomb Syria. No source was given and the story was later proven a hoax. Bloomberg still claims there are no S300 missiles in Syria though even Russia’s Foreign Minister Lavrov told the world on June 22, 2013 that the system had been operational for some time.
• Two short months ago, Susan Rice was accused of anti-Semitism. Now, armies of paid bloggers and pundits claim she was an Israeli agent all along. It is fascinating seeing Israel’s flexibility, its willingness to smear people, first as anti-Semites and then as anti-anti-Semites. Israel’s “shills” now smear Rice with bizarre conspiracy theories claiming she ordered the coup against Morsi on behalf of Israel. As Jim W. Dean says, “You just can’t make stuff like this up.”
• There are multiple confirmations that Israel lost one of their nuclear-armed German-built Dolphin submarines back in May. To atone for this humiliation, Israel now claims, using a Canadian based “Global” publication, that one of their Dolphin submarines destroyed Syria’s S300 air defense system using a cruise type missile. The supposed attack on July 5, 2013 destroyed “components” that make the system “undeployable” as the well-known supposed anti-Zionist website claims. Do we have another name to put an “X” beside?
• Despite the fact that Syria’s S300 air defense system has been online for months, something confirmed repeatedly, Israel continues to take credit for pressuring Russia into withholding delivery. Perhaps imaginary attacks reported in “controlled opposition” blogs might be less believable when, let us be clear, they were never believable in the first place. Do we call this the “war of the blogs?” How do you tell the winner, the craziest conspiracy theory? I think Israel may have the best talent pool in that department.
• As to Morsi’s downfall, Israel is “all over the map” on this one. First, they claim he was overthrown in an illegal coup. Then, when they find there is no hope for him, they take credit for orchestrating the coup against him while using “assets” like Senator John McCain to call for cutting off US aid to Egypt’s new government. If one policy doesn’t work, try every policy and take credit for which one seems to come out on top.
“Never accept meat from orcs”
The quotation above comes from “The Two Towers,” part of the Lord of the Rings trilogy by British author J.R.R. Tolkien. The warning was given to Pippen and Merry, two Halflings kidnapped by monstrous creatures called “orcs.” Orcs are cannibals.
The lesson applies to journalists as well though the term “journalist” no longer seems to have value as there is, it seems, no act, no matter how discrediting, a journalist under the protection of the Zionist lobby, can’t overcome.
Thus, stories seem to appear out of nowhere, no sources, no attributable quotes, but with the look and feel of what used to be called “real news.” There is one problem, however. When or if an attempt is made to confirm one of these hoaxes, they seem to be made of air.
Then again, when tracking down the origins, the endless reports of American “no-fly zones” over Syria, the tens of thousands of Russian troops invading America or Israel’s “slam dunk” control over President Obama and his cabinet and advisors, the origins are always mysterious websites or spam emails or worse, DEBKA.
The spots of the hyena
Edward Snowden was “put on the map” by Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian. Greenwald is an “asset” for sure but one that hasn’t been burned. As “Snowden” plays out, Greenwald will recede into the background to be drawn upon next time he is needed.
Where Greenwald holds a job, albeit a puppet of the Guardian, a British paper once known for its “opposition” leaning and now for its relationship to Her Majesty’s intelligence services, many others, pundits, bloggers, academics, columnists, “activists and experts” are harder to understand.
Toward that end, it is necessary to develop criteria not unlike that used by governments’ award security clearances, except, of course, in the case of Snowden.
Here are a few of the questions we might want to ask:
• Why do you hold the beliefs you do, what in your upbringing or personal life has led you to decide to make the sacrifices and to take the risks that opposing great power can represent?
• Where do you get the money to live?
• Who pays for your travel, your hotels and pays to have your books printed that nobody ever buys?
• Why do you avoid certain positions, fail to mention names or, as with many, seem to not even know Israel exists?
As we have, of late, been inundated with hoaxes, endless “gatekeepers” and literal armies of people who live “out of thin air” or who, though seemingly reviled, manage to get on BBC whenever they want, perhaps our investigatory efforts might well go to another level.
• In reading your body of work and reviewing your broadcast appearances, there seems to be a pattern of reverting to “talking points” that closely parallel those of groups such as the Heritage Foundation or AIPAC. Can you explain?
• In reviewing your body of work, some facts and conclusions seem to be purposefully steered almost as though you had been “tasked” with a need to dissemble or obfuscate. Can you explain?
• Similarly, when reviewing that same work, we note your writing style varies significantly from other works. Is someone actually giving you articles to publish under your name?
Then again, we could get more direct still.
• Who is your handler?