The Mark Weber Report

For more than a century, US foreign policy was based on the principle of non-intervention in overseas wars and disputes, and rejection of “entangling alliances.” In the 1890s this gave way to an expansionist, imperialistic and “messianic” foreign policy. Big business interests craved new markets overseas, sensationalist newspapers promoted military adventurism, and political and religious leaders sought to spread US-style “democracy” and “Christianity.” In 1898 the US — seizing on a pretext — declared war against Spain. The US acquired the Philippines and Puerto Rico, and used the occasion to take Hawaii and establish hegemony over Cuba. This was a landmark transition from a republic to an imperial power. Later, in two world wars, Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt vigorously pushed a globalist US foreign policy, justifying military intervention everywhere in the name of “democracy.” Today America’s “exceptionalist” role as a “world policeman” is increasingly resented everywhere as arrogant and hypocritical.

The Christmas message of peace, good will and respect for others is not just a Christian or even narrowly religious one. These timeless principles are important for nations as well as for individuals. But because American cultural and political life is controlled by a small but powerful minority with its own partisan agenda, US foreign policy has all too often been arrogant, bellicose and oppressive — with harmful long-term consequences for Americans and humanity. Due to the systematic misinformation about history and current affairs in the US many American Christians are woefully ignorant about their own religion and heritage, including basic facts about the Holy Land. Americans are encouraged to turn their backs on fellow Christians in the Holy Land, and are persuaded to instead identify with and support their oppressors.

Nothing more vividly underscores the depths to which American political life has fallen than the behavior of leading presidential candidates at a recent meeting of the “Republican Jewish Coalition.” They sought to outdo each other in bidding for support from the single most powerful and influential ethnic-religious group in the US. Such self-serving behavior is not new, but has long been an expression of the corruption of American political life. In 1947-48, President Harry Truman faced the choice of whether or not to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. Secretary of State Marshall, along with all other knowledgeable US officials, warned that support for Zionist ambitions in the Middle East would have harmful, long-term consequences for America and the world. But Truman ignored these warnings. By supporting the new Jewish state, he put partisan political considerations foremost. This fateful decision was the “original sin” of US Middle East policy.

Republican presidential candidates (with the notable exception of Ron Paul) and other prominent politicians boast of their belief in “American exceptionalism.” This is more than “feel good” talk. Such rhetoric is used as a pretext or justification for otherwise inexcusable policies that actually harm America and the world. Most of the world understandably regards such talk as dangerously arrogant and foolish. It’s no coincidence that the politicians who talk the loudest about “American exceptionalism” are also the most craven in their pandering to Jewish-Zionist power and vehement in their support for Israel. Americans are not inherently more virtuous or “freedom loving” than other peoples. America’s extraordinarily rapid rise, and its prosperity and eminence during the twentieth century, are due to objective historical factors, which are no longer as relevant as they were in the past.

A striking expression of the corruption of America’s social-political life is the ignorance and arrogance of its prominent politicians. The presidential candidates who addressed a recent “debate” in Washington, DC (with the notable exception of Ron Paul) showed that they lack principle, a coherent worldview, or a reality-based understanding of history. Along with empty “feel good” rhetoric about “American exceptionalism,” they also showed a craven pandering to Jewish-Zionist power. In any healthy and educated society, such individuals would be considered unfit for any position of authority or responsibility.

Many Americans believe that our country’s problems could be solved, at least in large measure, by “restoring” the “constitutional republic” and by “returning” to the letter and spirit of the US Constitution. But no constitution, even the most brilliantly written one, can save a society from corruption, ignorance, disorder, and poverty. What is crucial in determining the level of prosperity, education, orderliness and culture in a society is not its constitution, but rather the character, quality and values of its people, and especially its leaders. For many years now the US Supreme Court, reflecting the interests, agenda and ideology of those who hold power, has “interpreted” the Constitution to validate the programs and policies it likes — in blatant violation of the document’s original spirit and plain meaning. Few Americans realize just how undemocratic the “original” Constitution was, and how distrustful its authors were of power by “the people.” While the US Constitution is brilliantly conceived, it has major defects. It failed in the most serious crisis in US history: the Civil War. Now it’s little more than an instrument of those in power to provide a veneer of legality in furthering their interests and agenda.

The Nuremberg Tribunal of 1945-46 — the most spectacular judicial enterprise in history — was meant to prove that the defeated German regime had been one of unique and monstrous deceit, rapaciousness and evil. But in fact the Tribunal dispensed not justice, but injustice. The four Allied powers that organized and ran it were themselves guilty of some of the very same crimes they accused the German defendants of having committed. The Tribunal operated on the basis of “ex post facto” law created after the fact expressly for the occasion, and which the Allies applied only to the defeated. The hangings of German leaders ordered by the Tribunal were little more than murders glossed over with a veneer of makeshift, hypocritical pseudo-legality.

The French President recently called Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu “a liar” in a private conversation with President Obama that was overhead by journalists. “I cannot bear Netanyahu, he’s a liar,” Sarkozy said. Obama replied: “You’re sick of him, but I have to deal with him every day.” Behind this exchange is frustration over the routine deceit and arrogance of Israeli leaders, and the humiliation of bowing to Jewish-Zionist power. As the German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer once put it: “The power of the Jews, even today, especially in America, should not be underestimated.” This same power determines US policy in the Middle East. The new US ambassador to Israel, Daniel Shapiro, bluntly acknowledges that US policy in the region is driven by concern for Israel’s security and identity as a Jewish ethno-religious state — and not by what’s best for America and the world.