Antony Blinken will only ever side with Israel.

Right, so where it has been quite correct and appropriate to take Joe Biden to task for the US’s constant and unapologetic support that it has given to Israel, for all the attacks he justifiably invites over arms sales, over US Security Council vetoes, over his flesh pressing exercises, the number of innocent lives lost not deviating him in the slightest from that support, it’s the other guy who is just as big a problem, if not more so than Biden that is, at this point where we’re in ceasefire talks again, who is leading the charge demanding Hamas sign up to the ceasefire agreement, whilst providing cover for Benjamin Netanyahu, who hasn’t publicly announced his support for it either, and likely never will, because he’s the one that keeps scuppering the peace processes up in reality. I am of course referring to the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken. He’s cropped up in Israel again and quite honestly by this point he should more associated with peace talks collapsing than helping them succeed, because nobody is more on the side of Israel possibly on the planet than this guy is and he has the track record to prove it.
Right, so that was Antony Blinken the US Secretary of State there, once again in Israel at a crucial moment to basically tout for peace, when the reality is more like he’s there to shield Israel from any bad publicity when it all falls apart. He’s committing the US to Israel’s security, when it is that US commitment to that, that shields Israel from being held to account by the rest of the world. It is that commitment that excuses billions of US dollars being sent to a government wrecking it’s own nation’s economy for the sake of keeping this war against mostly women and children going, not to mention of course all the weapons being supplied, being bought with that money. Blinken reiterated that that is what the US do every day and made the point of saying they did that including on the day Iran attacked Israel, ignoring the fact, that that attack was actually a retaliation, after Israel blew up their embassy in Damascus. Facts Antony. He said additional assets have been deployed in recent weeks due to the heightened tensions, whilst ignoring the fact Israel striking Iran, Iraq, Gaza, the West Bank, Yemen, Syria and of course Lebanon in recent weeks has been the driver of that. Instead of taking Israel to task, you give them the tools to carry on and go on TV, go to do a press interview and do nothing but defend Israel no matter what they’ve done and excuse them therefore to carry on and then presumably defend what they’re going to do next, because it won’t be peace and you do that by risibly trying to convince us all after 10 months of genocide, that the assets as you keep calling them, when we know it’s arms, billions of dollars worth of arms, that have been deployed and you call it a deterrent. Israel will use them, because they get through weaponry in Gaza at breakneck speed. 70,000 tons of bombs have been dropped on an area in ten months a fraction of the size of London, that is roughly the same size as Philadelphia and you continue to supply them as a deterrent given what we’ve witnessed? The shamelessness is off the charts, not least when he followed that up by saying if the deterrent as he called it didn’t work, the US would be prepared to defend Israel, presumably with even more weaponry that’ll just be a deterrent and won’t possibly be used, but we’ll get onto that more in a bit.
Blinken talks of other nations going to try and calm the situation down, David Lammy rushed off out there of course, though has been repeatedly ignored by Netanyahu, yet Blinken would cite those such as Lammy for going out there to try and stop escalation, when it is their siding with Israel and their arming of Israel and their unquestioning support for Israel that is driving more conflict. Not according to Blinken though. It’s not Israel’s fault, it’s everybody else around them, still justifying Israel’s response to the night of October 7th regardless of the disproportionate levels Israel have reached. Still defending 10 months of genocide as legitimate self defence for a single nights incursion by Hamas which resulted in the seizure of hostages, hostages taken to demand Israel release theirs, though of course they get referred to as prisoners implying they are legitimately held, when nothing could be further from the truth. If preventing the conflict from escalating and spreading, then you’re backing the wrong horse.
Antony Blinken, for the people of Gaza is tantamount to something like the Angel of Death. He went to Israel for the first time following the events of October 7th just 5 days later on the 12th, saying at that point he came as a Jew, which considering the conflict was between one so called Jewish state and another that isn’t, should have negated him from taking part in any further negotiations, he’d basically declared by saying that he was picking a side. It forfeited any diplomatic leverage he might have had due to his position as Secretary of State. A month later, whilst of course the north of the Gaza Strip was still under assault, Blinken turned up to attend a war cabinet meeting. He should have been saying at this point, what are you doing? Stop this, you’re more likely to kill your own hostages than rescue them, but as of course we now ought to know, it’s never been about he hostages, not when Israel were allegedly killing their own people on the night of October 7th to stop them being taken hostage! We’re now at a point where more than 40,000 Gazans have been killed and Blinken is back in Israel again, making that speech, days after his department got another $20bn of aid for Israel signed off, so that this genocide could now persist for years to come, and against other nations too as we’re already seeing.
So he’s back to push this ceasefire deal, but it isn’t even a ceasefire deal. Where Netanyahu won’t agree to a full ceasefire, Blinken accepts that, but he’ll go on demanding Hamas and speak to other Arabic nations besides and say to them the same thing and to tell Hamas the same thing, that they should accept this latest deal. Blinken even basically stands there as if Netanyahu has agreed to it, when he never has backed a ceasefire yet, in fact is seen as the main obstacle to one, because it would finish him as Prime Minister of Israel, for reasons I’ve gone over in many videos before now so won’t do so again here. Functionally whenever Netanyahu and Blinken meet, you must wonder what they talk about for hours on end, because ultimately they come out, smiling, shaking hands, posing for the camera with Netanyahu still actually refusing to back a ceasefire and Blinken just repeating that Israel has the support of the US.
Hamas, despite having agreed previous ceasefire deals that again Netanyahu hasn’t, have already rejected the latest one, one reason being they know Netanyahu won’t agree to it either, but the main points about it should be noted, since this ceasefire deal doesn’t actually include a bloody ceasefire!
No free movement of Gazans as Netanyahu demands a checkpoint at the Israeli built corridor4 across the middle of Gaza, the Nevatim Corridor, Israel retains control of the Rafah border crossing and the Philadelphi Corridor, which is the border between Gaza and Egypt, even though that is in violation of a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, the Camp David Accords and Netanyahu has changed the rules regarding prisoner exchange as well, meaning they can’t be completed. It's an absolute joke and this is what Blinken is currently pushing. Whatever Israel wants effectively.
Antony Blinken does not operate impartially, he is on Israel’s side, he is enabling them and seems resolute in continuing to do just that, but why? Is it just AIPAC funding, that like many politicians it is the donors that have the real power or is there something more and in Blinken’s case I think it’s the latter, given his own personal history and his family’s relationship with Israel.
Antony Blinken’s grandfather was a chap called Maurice Henry Blinken and this excerpt from the New York Times obituary of the man from 1986 might prove illustrative of that point:
‘Maurice H. Blinken, a New York lawyer who founded the American Palestine Institute after World War II, died Sunday at the Good Samaritan Hospital, West Palm Beach, Fla., after a long illness. He was 86 years old and lived in Palm Beach.
In 1946, under Mr. Blinken's direction, the institute initiated and financed a report by several economists, ''Palestine: Problem and Promise,'' which argued that an independent Jewish state was economically viable.
This rebutted a British white paper that contended Palestine could not economically support a large immigrant population.
The institute's report is said to have helped persuade the United States Government to support the establishment of the State of Israel.’
Zionist Jewish state viable, Palestine not so much, Maurice Blinken’s report via his American Palestine Institute, helped persuade the US to support the establishment of the state of Israel. Blinken’s family history is intrinsically tied to the creation of Israel itself. But there’s more.
His parents divorced, which resulted in Antony Blinken moving with his mother to Paris along with her second husband who was a chap called Samuel Pisar. Pisar is an interesting guy, the only child of some 900 in a Polish school to survive the war, he himself having at one point escaped a Nazi death squad, by hiding in the wreck of a US tank.
He became a lawyer, seems lots of people in Blinken’s family did, not least Blinken himself, worked for the UN, and later became part of JFK’s foreign policy task force. The US saving Pisar’s life instilled in Blinken, who was close to him, a belief that, according to a Politico article, US military intervention can only ever be a good thing, that US power is a moral power. So a family history of a belief in US intervention being a good thing, combined with Israel’s right to exist being something his grandfather it can be argued helped bring into being, is it any surprise Antony Blinken has turned out how he has? But equally, does it not show that when impartiality is key, and given his own actions over the last 10 months, is he not the worst person for the job he’s got right now in terms of actually seeing the delivery of peace, when that clearly requires taking Israel to task?
It's not as if the Biden administration can’t possibly know that either, can clearly see what needs to be done in a war scenario to stop escalation, trying to bully Hamas into agreeing to a non ceasefire clearly not being it, but stopping Keir Starmer from starting WWIII with Russia, not once, but twice as he’s had to be stopped now, in relation to arms sales to Ukraine and what Starmer told Zelensky he could use them for? Well Biden intervened fast enough there as this video recommendation will give you all the details of and I’ll hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.