Jay,

 your rational Romanian who made the "best ever" comment in response to negative responses to your "mass psychology" article says...

"Why did Germany stay silent during the Israeli offensive in January? – because of its guilt trauma, still unhealed after sixty years."

This is rubbish. He's trying to unpick ideology, and long may he do so, but he should look at how he's got distracted from the facts. Either he wasn't following coverage of the Gaza massacre very attentively when it was actually happening (which is unlikely), or he's allowed himself to forget. Because Germany did not stay silent.

29 Dec 2008

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,598724,00.html
"Israeli Self-Defense Merkel Blasts Hamas for Middle East Violence"

3 Jan 2009

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3915847,00.html
"Germany Urges Muslim Nations to Help End Hamas Attacks

German Foreign Minister Steinmeier has pressed Muslim nations to use their influence to help secure an end to Hamas militants' rocket attacks on Israel, saying it was the only way to clear the path for a ceasefire."

"German Chancellor Angela Merkel has also come out in strong support of  Israel during the recent conflict, accusing Hamas of terrorism in her New Year's address."

1 Jan 2009

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/248552,berlin-defends-merkel-stance-on-gaza-fighting.html

"Berlin - A spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel rejected criticism Thursday of her forthright support for Israel during the conflict with Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Merkel's assessment, offered during her New Year address, matched that of the European Union foreign ministers, the spokesman said.

She had made it clear that she too desired a truce in the fighting as soon as possible, he added.
'However conditions have to be met, and the most important condition in the view of the chancellor is that Israel's security must be secured,' said the spokesman at her office."

The refrain throughout western government press offices during the Gaza massacre was that "Israel has the right to defend itself". Only two governments actually did something against the flow. They were in Bolivia and Venezuela.

Interestingly, parliaments did their bit for their propaganda masters too.

9 Jan 2010:

US: House Resolution 34:

"Recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza"

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr111-34

The bill was introduced the day before it was passed, and without any discussion.
390 for, 5 against

The following month, various parliaments were involved in the "London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism". Parliamentarians agreed that

"Parliamentarians shall expose, challenge, and isolate political actors who engage in hate against Jews and target the State of Israel"

"Governments and the UN should resolve that never again will the institutions of the international community and the dialogue of nation states be abused to try to establish any legitimacy for antisemitism, including the singling out of Israel for discriminatory treatment in the international arena, and we will never witness – or be party to - another gathering like Durban in 2001"

(what, no return to Z=R then?)

"Education Authorities should ensure that freedom of speech is upheld within the law and to protect students and staff from illegal antisemitic discourse and a hostile environment in whatever form it takes including calls for boycotts"

"Parliamentarians should engage with civil society institutions and leading NGOs to create partnerships that bring about change locally, domestically and globally, and support efforts that encourage Holocaust education, inter-religious dialogue and cultural exchange"

Grok that last bit. A few months later, the British "MPs expenses scandal" happened, which had considerable influence over who got seats and who didn't in the next election, and led to the downfall of the Commons Speaker, whose replacement, John Bercow, had a "manifesto" for his election to that office. In that document, which is here:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/files/the-speakership-in-the-twenty-first-century.pdf
he says...

"Successive Speakers have supported charities, and hosted a diverse range of groups and visiting delegations in Parliament. The time has come to go beyond this, visiting and reaching out to a range of public institutions and voluntary bodies. This engagement, communication and interaction must be a two-way process."

aka the AIPACisation of Westminster.

You may be interested in the efforts and tribulations of Baroness Tonge (Liberal):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Tonge,_Baroness_Tonge

More recently we get obviously false-flag stuff like this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/02/free-gaza-youth-manifesto-palestinian
"An anonymous group of students has created a document to express their frustration born of Hamas's violent crackdowns on 'western decadence', the destruction wreaked by Israel's attacks and the political games played by Fatah and the UN"

Now that the political-public-relations boys have moved on from "colour revolutions" to more advanced stuff, I keep wondering whether some version or other might be used in the UK in the near future.

That's all for now. Keep well!

JC