| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 8:42 pm Post subject: Neo-Con potpourri |
| Subj: [shamireaders] Neo-Con potpourri
Date: 1/2/04 10:12:19 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: shamir@home.se
Reply-to: shamireaders-owner@yahoogroups.com
To: shamireaders@yahoogroups.com
A few days ago, Joel Mowbray published an article called General Zinni, what
a Ninny
(see at the bottom of the letter), where he described Zinni as (you guessed
right) an antisemite, for Neo-Con is just an euphemism for a Jew. His
conclusion: don't even mention neo-cons unless you wish to dare the holiest
taboo of the West.
Here are two differing responses: one by Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com; who
denies the accusation, and another, by the intrepid professor of California
University, Kevin MacDonald, who cheerfully admits it. Both are good, but
for us, the friends of Palestine, breaking of the taboo is a necessity, as
until broken, Sharon will rule Palestine and Mowbray will terrorise the
peace-loving Americans. The article of KMD is slightly emended in agreement
with the author.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j010204.html
January 2, 2004
SMEARING GENERAL ZINNI
Joel Mowbray, total as*hole by Justin Raimondo
General Anthony Zinni, formerly chief of Central Command, who voted for
George W. Bush in the last election and describes himself as a
"Hagel-Lugar-Powell Republican," has been among the most vocal and visible
of the military critics of the Iraq war. Last year, he spoke for many top
military personnel when he warned that an invasion of Iraq would unleash
forces that could prove difficult if not impossible to control:
"You could inherit the country of Iraq, if you're willing to do it - if our
economy is so great that you're willing to put billions of dollars into
reforming Iraq. If you want to put soldiers that are already stretched so
thin all around the world and add them into a security force there forever,
like we see in places like the Sinai. If you want to fight with other
countries in the region to try to keep Iraq together as Kurds and Shiites
try and split off, you're going to have to make a good case for that. And
that's what I think has to be done, that's my honest opinion."
Zinni was right. So was Gen. Merrill A. McPeak. So was Marine Gen. John J.
Sheehan. So was Gen. Norman Schwartzkopf. So was former Navy Secretary and
much-decorated Marine veteran James Webb. So was Commander Maj. Gen.
Patrick Cordingley. So were a host of other top officers, both retired and
active duty, who saw another Vietnam - or worse - in the neocons' plans for
postwar Iraq. They no doubt cringed whenever they heard neoconservative
agitator and war profiteer Richard Perle describe the coming conquest of
Iraq as a "cakewalk." Here was another brilliant idea dreamed up by
civilian national security intellectuals soon to turn into a living
nightmare for the grunts on the ground.
The War Party was never all that worried about opposition coming from the
Left, which is all too easy to mock and marginalize. Antiwar conservatives
posed a more complex but less immediate problem, since these amounted to a
small if vocal minority on the Right. But when American military leaders
began to speak out against their imperial adventure, the neocons had a
major conniption. Claiming that the sacred principle of civilian control of
the military was being violated, the neocons ordered the soldiers to go
back to their barracks and never return to the public square. Yet they have
returned, to wonder aloud why they were not listened to. A recent
Washington Post profile of General Zinni cites him attempting to answer
this question:
"The more he listened to [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz and
other administration officials talk about Iraq, the more Zinni became
convinced that interventionist 'neoconservative' ideologues were plunging
the nation into a war in a part of the world they didn't understand. 'The
more I saw, the more I thought that this was the product of the neocons who
didn't understand the region and were going to create havoc there. These
were dilettantes from Washington think tanks who never had an idea that
worked on the ground.'"
"SThe goal of transforming the Middle East by imposing democracy by force
reminds him of the 'domino theory' in the 1960s that the United States had
to win in Vietnam to prevent the rest of Southeast Asia from falling into
communist hands. And that brings him back to Wolfowitz and his
neoconservative allies as the root of the problem. 'I don't know where the
neocons came from - that wasn't the platform they ran on,' he says.
'Somehow, the neocons captured the president. They captured the vice
president.'"
As Iraq degenerates into a maelstrom of violence and warring
ethno-religious enclaves, Lebanon writ large, the neoconservatives who
schemed for years to drag us into this disastrous war have been flushed out
of the shadows and thrust into the spotlight. And they don't like it one
bit. Monsters love the dark.
The bloody failure of their policy has forced the neocons out into the
open, and they are screeching in pain, like Dracula pulled from the tomb.
We can hear - in their shrieking cadences, their whiny shrillness, their
sheer unpleasantness - what it means to be a cornered rat. The sound is
music to my ears. But don't get too close: rats are often rabid, and they
bite, as in the case of Joel Mowbray's recent column smearing General
Anthony Zinni as an anti-Semite:
"Discussing the Iraq war with the Washington Post last week, former General
Anthony Zinni took the path chosen by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on
the Jews. Neither President Bush nor Vice-President Cheney - nor for that
matter Zinni's old friend, Secretary of State Colin Powell - was to blame.
It was the Jews. They 'captured' both Bush and Cheney, and Powell was
merely being a 'good soldier.'"
Written in the style of a bathroom-wall scrawl - "General Zinni, what a
ninny" is the title of this juvenile screed - Mowbray's ravings amount to a
kind of political pornography. Pornography is, after all, wish-fulfillment,
and don't the neocons dearly wish they could get away with marginalizing
their most formidable opponents in this way. As the conservative scholar
Claes Ryn has pointed out, conceit is the one defining characteristic of
the neocons, whose political platform is the embodiment of hubris. They can
get away with anything, or so they believe, even a vicious smear campaign
directed against a man of unimpeachable integrity.
Evidence? Mowbray doesn't have any, as he readily admits, except the rather
odd linguistic revisionism that translates "neocon" to mean a person of the
Jewish faith:
"Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East
didn't say 'Jews.' He instead used a term that has become a new favorite
for anti-Semites: 'neoconservatives.' As the name implies,
'neoconservative' was originally meant to denote someone who is a newcomer
to the right. In the 90's, many people self-identified themselves as
'neocons,' but today that term has become synonymous with 'Jews.'"
Some crimes against both nature and society are so awful or otherwise
memorable that the transgressors have their transgressions named after
them, such as Sadism, sodomy, and now mowbraying, which means telling a lie
so brazen as to make every decent person within earshot cringe with
embarrassment.
Far from deterring the mowbrayer, however, such a response only emboldens
him to raise the decibel level:
"And if anybody should know better, it's Gen. Zinni. It is well-known that
those who are labeled 'neocons' within the administration - whether the
number-two official at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, or undersecretary of
Defense Doug Feith - are almost always Jews. S yet Cheney and Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld - neither one Jewish - [are described] as simply
'key allies.' Policy beliefs and worldviews were not different between
these two groups; only religion distinguishes them."
To begin with, the Business Week piece doesn't focus on the Jewishness of
neoconservatives in high office, it merely names them. Are we supposed to
understand these officials are above criticism because they are Jewish?
Secondly, there are significant differences between the neocons and
Rumsfeld, as Max Boot - writing in the January issue of Foreign Policy
magazine, not online yet - and the Weekly Standard/Project for a New
American Century crew have recently made clear. Rummy and a growing chorus
of grumbling Republicans in Congress want an expedited exit strategy, which
is one reason for the neocons' increasing desperation.
Jonah Goldberg once tried to pull this same "neocon = Jew" card trick, at
more length but without much more success. According to the former editor
of National Review Online, neoconservatism, having become the conservative
mainstream, is a relic of the past: "We're all neoconservatives now," as
David Brooks once put it. But Goldberg's argument fell apart soon after it
was made, when Irving Kristol announced the neocons' revival in the pages
the Weekly Standard, and we haven't heard a peep from him on the subject
since then.
From a mode of self-denial, the neocons, it seems, have discovered the joys
of Neocon Liberation. As various neocons have began to come out of the
closet, so to speak, and identify themselves with the love (of war, of
Israel, of "national greatness" and "big government conservatism") that
usually didn't dare speak its name, Mowbray's contention that neocon - the
n-word - is an ethnic slur just isn't with it. Look at this list of
luminaries standing up to declare for Neocon Pride: "godfather" Irving, Max
Boot, Richard Perle, who proudly defended the neocons in a recent debate
with Joshua Marshall, and Stephen Schwartz, the Michelangelo Signorile of
the neocon set in Washington, who "outed" Wolfowitz as part of a group of
closet neo-Trotskyites (or Trotsky-cons, as National Review dubbed them).
In answer to an email query from me, Mowbray qualified his argument:
"I know there are still many self-identified 'neocons,' but I also know
that in many, if not most, contexts, it has become a code word. Zinni knows
that for inside-the-beltway types (which he is), 'neocon' has become
synonymous with 'Jew.' But it wasn't just that; it was the way he used the
term that I take issue with. Please note that I did not take Zinni to task
for criticizing 'neocon' policies or even 'neocons' generally; I have no
problem with that. What he did was take a known code word and combine it
with a classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that Jews rule the world by
acting as Puppetmasters. (Remember, he said that both Bush & Cheney had
'somehow' been 'captured' by the 'neocons.') That's a far cry from
critiquing particular policies or even specific individuals."
What's interesting about this response is that he acknowledges that there
is such a thing as a neoconservative policy, after all: so the word isn't
an ethnic slur, as presented in his original piece. His contention that
neocon is a "code word" known only to Washington "insiders" (such as
himself) - decades of scholarly books and articles on the subject of
neoconservatism as a distinct ideology to the contrary notwithstanding - is
hardly convincing.
As for the "context" of Zinni's remark somehow transforming the formal
meaning of "neocon" into a hate crime: why couldn't the adherents of an
ideology - neoconservatism - proselytize and capture the allegiance of the
President, the Vice President, and other high officials, especially in the
wake of 9/11? Zinni's attack on those who pined for war with Iraq has
nothing to do with the ethno-religious obsessions and persecution complexes
of Mowbray, and everything to do with the neocons' destructive and
dangerous policies.
Except for Mowbray's bald assertion that "everybody knows" what they don't
know, there is not a single shred of evidence to back up the claim that
Zinni is a Hitlerite. But the idea of mowbraying is that you don't need any
but the most tenuous and improbable proof to slime the object of your
attention: it is the political equivalent of Tourette's Syndrome.
- Justin Raimondo
-------------------------
Let's name the Jew
By Prof. Kevin MacDonald
kmacd@csulb.edu
Go to original for article links:
http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=9888
Over the last year, there's been a torrent of articles on neoconservatism
raising (usually implicitly) some vexing issues: Are neoconservatives
different
from other conservatives? Is neoconservatism a Jewish movement? Is it
"anti-Semitic" to say so?
The dispute between the neocons and more traditional conservatives - "
paleoconservatives" - is especially important because the latter now find
themselves on the outside, looking in on the conservative power structure.
Hopefully, some of the venom has been taken out of this argument by the
remarkable recent article by neoconservative "godfather" Irving Kristol
("The
Neoconservative Persuasion," Weekly Standard, August 25, 2003). With
commendable
frankness, Kristol admitted that:
"the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to
be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in
general,
against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics
suitable to governing a modern democracy."
And, equally frankly, Kristol eschewed any attempt to justify U.S. support
for Israel in terms of American national interest:
"[L]arge nations, whose identity is ideological, like the Soviet Union of
yesteryear and the United States of today, inevitably have ideological
interests
in addition to more material concerns. That is why we feel it necessary to
defend Israel today, when its survival is threatened. No complicated
geopolitical
calculations of national interest are necessary."
If the US is an "ideological" nation, this can only mean that the
motivations of neoconservative ideology are a legitimate subject of
intellectual
inquiry.
For example, it is certainly true that the neocons' foreign policy fits well
with a plausible version of Jewish interests, but is arguably only tenuously
related to the interests of the U.S. Also, neocons oppose the isolationism
of
important sections of traditional American conservatism. And neocon
attitudes
on issues like race and immigration differ profoundly from those of
traditional mainstream conservatives - but resemble closely the common
attitudes of the
wider American Jewish community.
Count me among those who accept that the Jewish commitment of leading
neoconservatives has become a critical influence on U.S. policies, and that
the
effectiveness of the neoconservatives is greatly enhanced by their alliance
with
the organized Jewish community. In my opinion, this conclusion is based on
solid
data and reasonable inferences. But like any other theory, of course, it is
subject to reasoned discussion and disproof.
We shouldn't be surprised by the importance of ethnicity in human affairs.
Nor should we be intimidated by charges of anti-Semitism. We should be able
to
discuss these issues openly and honestly. This is a practical matter, not a
moral one.
Ethnic politics in the U.S. are certainly not limited to Jewish activism.
They are an absolutely normal phenomenon throughout history and around the
world.
But for well over half a century, with rare exceptions, Jewish influence has
been off-limits for rational discussion. Now, however, as the U.S. acquires
an
empire in the Middle East, this ban must inevitably fall away.
My views on these issues are shaped by my research on several other
influential Jewish-dominated intellectual and political movements, including
the
Boasian school of anthropology, Freudian psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt
School of
Social Research, Marxism and several other movements of the radical left, as
well
as the movement to change the ethnic balance of the United States by
allowing
mass, non-traditional immigration.
My conclusion: Contemporary neoconservatism fits into the general pattern of
Jewish intellectual and political activism I have identified in my work.
I am not, of course, saying that all Jews, or even most Jews, supported
these
movements. Nor did these movements work in concert: some were intensely
hostile to one another. I am saying, however, that the key figures in these
movements identified in some sense as Jews and viewed their participation as
in some
sense advancing Jewish interests.
In all of the Jewish intellectual and political movements I studied, there
is
a strong Jewish identity among the core figures. All center on charismatic
Jewish leaders-people such as Boas, Trotsky and Freud- who are revered as
messianic, god-like figures.
Neoconservatism's key founders trace their intellectual ancestry to the "New
York Intellectuals," a group that originated as followers of Trotskyite
theoretician Max Schactman in the 1930s and centered around influential
journals
like Partisan Review and Commentary (which is in fact published by the
American
Jewish Committee). In the case of neoconservatives, their early identity as
radical leftist disciples shifted as there began to be evidence of
anti-Semitism
in the Soviet Union. Key figures in leading them out of the political left
were philosopher Sydney Hook and Elliot Cohen, editor of Commentary. Such
men
as Hook, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Nathan Glazer and Seymour Martin
Lipset, were deeply concerned about anti-Semitism and other Jewish issues.
Many
of them worked closely with Jewish activist organizations. After the 1950s,
they became increasingly disenchanted with leftism. Their overriding concern
was the welfare of Israel.
By the 1970s, the neocons were taking an aggressive stance against the
Soviet
Union, which they saw as a bastion of anti-Semitism and opposition to
Israel.
Richard Perle was the prime organizer of Congressional support for the 1974
Jackson-Vanik Amendment which angered the Soviet Union by linking bilateral
trade issues to freedom of emigration, primarily of Jews from the Soviet
Union to
Israel and the United States.
Current key leaders include an astonishing number of individuals well placed
to influence the Bush Administration: (Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle,
Douglas
Feith, I. Lewis Libby, Elliott Abrams, John Bolton, David Wurmser, Abram
Shulsky), interlocking media and thinktankdom (Bill Kristol, Michael Ledeen,
Stephen Bryen, John Podhoretz, Daniel Pipes), and the academic world
(Richard
Pipes, Donald Kagan).
As the neoconservatives lost faith in radical leftism, several key neocons
became attracted to the writings of Leo Strauss, a classicist and political
philosopher at the University of Chicago. Strauss had a very strong Jewish
identity and viewed his philosophy as a means of ensuring Jewish survival in
the
Diaspora. As he put it in a 1962 Hillel House lecture, later republished in
Leo
Strauss: Political Philosopher and Jewish Thinker:
"I believe I can say, without any exaggeration, that since a very, very
early
time the main theme of my reflections has been what is called the 'Jewish
'Question'."
Strauss has become a cult figure-the quintessential rabbinical guru with
devoted disciples.
While Strauss and his followers have come to be known as neoconservatives -
and have even claimed to be simply "conservatives"- there is nothing
conservative about their goals. This is most obviously the case in foreign
policy,
where they are attempting to rearrange the entire Middle East in the
interests of
Israel. But it is also the case with domestic policy, where acceptance of
rule
by an aristocratic elite would require a complete political transformation.
Strauss believed that this aristocracy would be compatible with Jewish
interests.
Strauss notoriously described the need for an external exoteric language
directed at outsiders, and an internal esoteric language directed at ingroup
members. In other words, the masses had to be deceived.
But actually this is a general feature of the movements I have studied. They
invariably frame issues in language that appeals to non-Jews, rather than
explicitly in terms of Jewish interests. The most common rhetoric used by
Jewish
intellectual and political movements has been the language of moral
universalism and the language of science-languages that appeal to the
educated elites of
the modern Western world. But beneath the rhetoric it is easy to find
statements expressing the Jewish agendas of the principle actors.
For example, anthropologists under the leadership of Boas viewed their
crusade against the concept of "race" as, in turn, combating anti-Semitism.
They
also saw their theories as promoting the ideology of cultural pluralism,
which
served perceived Jewish interests because the U.S. would be seen as
consisting
of many co-equal cultures rather than as a European Christian society.
Similarly, psychoanalysts commonly used their theories to portray
anti-Jewish
attitudes as symptoms of psychiatric disorder.
The earlier generation of American Jewish Trotskyites was sympathetic to the
Soviet Union until it became obvious that the SU is not ruled by Jews any
more.
Neoconservatives have certainly appealed to American patriotic platitudes in
advocating war throughout the Middle East-gushing about spreading American
democracy and freedom to the area, while leaving unmentioned their own
strong
ethnic ties and family links to Israel.
Michael Lind has called attention to the neoconservatives' "odd bursts of
ideological enthusiasm for 'democracy'"- odd because these calls for
democracy
and freedom throughout the Middle East are also coupled with support for the
Likud Party and other like-minded groups in Israel that are driven by a
vision
of an ethnocentric, expansionist Israel that, to outside observers at least,
bears an unmistakable (albeit unmentionable) resemblance to apartheid South
Africa.
These inconsistencies of the neoconservatives are not odd or surprising. The
Straussian idea is to achieve the aims of the elite ingroup by using
language
designed for mass appeal. War for "democracy and freedom" sells much better
than a war explicitly aimed at achieving the foreign policy goals of Israel.
Neoconservatives have responded to charges that their foreign policy has a
Jewish agenda by labeling any such analysis as "anti-Semitic." Similar
charges
have been echoed by powerful activist Jewish organizations like the ADL and
the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
But at the very least, Jewish neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, who were
deeply involved in pushing for the war in Iraq, should frankly discuss how
their close family and personal ties to Israel have affected their attitudes
on
US foreign policy in the Middle East.
Wolfowitz, however, has refused to discuss this issue beyond terming such
suggestions "disgraceful."
A common argument is that neoconservatism is not Jewish because of the
presence of various non-Jews amongst their ranks.
But in fact, the ability to recruit prominent non-Jews, while nevertheless
maintaining a Jewish core and a commitment to Jewish interests, has been a
hallmark-perhaps the key hallmark-of influential Jewish intellectual and
political
movements throughout the 20th century. Freud's commented famously on the
need
for a non-Jew to represent psychoanalysis, a role played by Ernest Jones and
C. G. Jung. Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict were the public face of Boasian
anthropology. And, although Jews represented over half the membership of
both
the Socialist Party and the Communist Party USA at various times, neither
party ever had Jews as presidential candidates and no Jew held the top
position in
the Communist Party USA after 1929.
In all the Jewish intellectual and political movements I reviewed, non-Jews
have been accepted and given highly-visible roles. Today, those roles are
played most prominently by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld whose ties with
neoconservatives go back many years. It makes excellent psychological sense
to have
the spokespeople for any movement resemble the people they are trying to
convince.
In fact, neoconservatism is rather unusual in the degree to which policy
formulation - as opposed to implementation - is so predominantly Jewish.
Perhaps
this reflects U.S. conditions in the late 20th century.
All the Jewish intellectual and political movements I studied were typified
by a deep sense of orthodoxy-a sense of "us versus them." Dissenters are
expelled, usually amid character assassination and other recriminations.
This has certainly been a feature of the neocon movement. The classic recent
example of this "We vs. They" world is David Frum's attack on "unpatriotic
conservatives" as anti-Semites. Any conservative who opposes the Iraq war as
contrary to U.S. interests and who notes the pro-Israeli motivation of many
of
the important players, is not to be argued with, but eradicated. "We turn
our
backs on them." This is not the spirit out of which the Anglo-American
parliamentary tradition was developed, and in fact was not endorsed by other
non-Jewish pro-war conservatives.
Jewish intellectual and political movements have typically had ready access
to prestigious mainstream media channels, and this is certainly true for the
neocons. The anchoring by the Washington Post of the columns of Charles
Krauthammer and Robert Kagan and by the New York Times of William Safire's
illustrates this. But probably more important recently has been the
invariable summoning
of neoconservatives to represent the "conservative" line on the TV Networks.
Is it unreasonable to suppose that this may be somewhat influenced by the
famously heavy Jewish role in these operations?
Immigration policy provides a valuable acid test for the proposition the
neoconservatism is actually a vehicle for perceived Jewish ethnic interests.
I
believe I have been able to demonstrate that pro-immigration elements in
American
public life have, for over a century, been largely led, funded, energized
and
organized by the Jewish community [PDF file]. American Jews have taken this
line, with a few isolated exceptions, because they have believed, as Leonard
S.
Glickman, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, has bluntly
stated, "The more diverse American society is the safer [Jews] are." Having
run out of Russian Jews, the HIAS is now deeply involved in recruiting
refugees
from Africa.
When, in the middle 1990s an immigration reform movement arose amongst
American conservatives, the reaction of the neoconservatives ranged from
cold to
hostile. No positive voice was permitted on the Op-Ed page of the Wall
Street
Journal, by then a neoconservative domain. (Perhaps significantly, a more
recent
exception has been a relatively favorable review of the anti-illegal
immigration book Mexifornia- whose author, the military historian Victor
Davis Hanson,
has distinguished himself by the extreme hawkishness of his views on the
Middle East.) The main vehicle of immigration reform sentiment, National
Review,
once a bastion of traditional conservative thought, was quite quickly
captured
by neoconservatives and its opposition to immigration reduced to nominal.
Prior to the post-9/11 U.S. invasion of the Middle East, this suppression of
the immigration reform impulse among conservatives was probably the single
most important contribution of the neoconservatives to the course of U.S.
history.
It may yet prove to be the most disastrous.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
General Zinni, what a Ninny
Joel Mowbray
December 31, 2003 | Print | Send Discussing the Iraq war with the
Washington Post last week, former General Anthony Zinni took the path chosen
by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on the Jews.
Neither President Bush nor Vice-President Cheney-nor for that matter Zinni
's old friend, Secretary of State Colin Powell-was to blame. It was the
Jews. They "captured" both Bush and Cheney, and Powell was merely being a
"good soldier."
Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East
didn't say "Jews." He instead used a term that has become a new favorite
for anti-Semites: "neoconservatives." As the name implies,
"neoconservative" was originally meant to denote someone who is a newcomer
to the right. In the 90's, many people self-identified themselves as
"neocons," but today that term has become synonymous with "Jews."
And if anybody should know better, it's Gen. Zinni. It is well-known that
those who are labeled "neocons" within the administration-whether the
number-two official at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, or undersecretary of
Defense Doug Feith-are almost always Jews.
Sadly typical is a Business Week article this May that identified
Wolfowitz, Feith, Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle, former Reagan
administration official Ken Adelman and Weekly Standard editor William
Kristol-all Jews-as "neocons," yet Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld-neither one Jewish-as simply "key allies." Policy beliefs and
worldviews were not different between these two groups; only religion
distinguishes them.
Given that the "neocons" do not control the Departments of State or
Defense nor the National Security Council-gentiles all head those
agencies-and given that the White House is clearly run by non-Jews, how is
it that Zinni claims that the "neocons" were responsible for the U.S.
liberating Iraq? As he explains to the Post, "Somehow, the neocons captured
the president. They captured the vice president."
And the Post piece uses dramatic language when discussing Zinni's views on
the "neocons":
"The more he listened to Wolfowitz and other administration officials talk
about Iraq, the more Zinni became convinced that interventionist
'neoconservative' ideologues were plunging the nation into a war in a part
of the world they didn't understand."
Zinni's comments are eerily similar to those made by former Malaysian
Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad at the Organization of the Islamic
Conference summit this October. In a speech that drew a standing ovation
from the leaders of Muslim nations in attendance, Mahathir remarked, "Today
the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for
them."
Since Jews make up roughly 2% of the American population and less than a
fraction of one percent of the world's-yet attract disproportionately more
of the world's bigoted venom-the only way to perpetuate the hatred of Jews
that has existed for centuries is to blame them for controlling vital
industries, "ruling the world by proxy," or by "capturing" the leader of the
free world and his likewise freely elected vice-president.
Let's suppose for a moment that Zinni, who could not be reached for
comment, had no idea that "neocon" has become code for "Jew." At best, his
statements were simply ludicrous. Both Cheney and Bush had full knowledge
of the unabated evil of Saddam Hussein-the former even having helped lead
the Gulf War as the Secretary of Defense-and neither needed to be "captured"
by anyone to understand the need to rid the world of Saddam's tyranny.
But now let's suppose Zinni has at least minimal common sense and at least
passively follows Washington politics. In that instance, Zinni's comments
are not much different than Mahathir's-and just as inaccurate. As anyone
with even a passing knowledge of the administration can tell you, the
president and the vice-president were probably the two biggest advocates for
liberating Iraq. Even at the staff level, the majority of the leading
"hawks" were gentiles such as National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice and
White House chief of staff Andrew Card.
It's a shame that someone who so honorably served his nation for three
decades would tarnish his legacy with such idiotic remarks. If he didn't
mean to use "neocon" as a code word for "Jew," he should say so. But if he
meant to, then he should just shut up.
©2003 Joel Mowbray Contact Joel Mowbray
Joel's address is:
http://cf.townhall.com/contact/columnists.cfm?ID=44&Post=10940
To subscribe to this group, send an email to: shamireaders-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shamireaders/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shamireaders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2004 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: Get America out of Iraq Fast |
| Subj: Re: Get America out of Iraq Fast
Date: 1/3/04 2:54:05 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: hectorpv@comcast.net
John,
Likudnik Oded Yinon was promoting the dissolution of Israel's enemies back in 1982. See "The Zionist Plan for the Middle East," which was translated and edited by Israel Shahak.
http://www.theunjustmedia.com/the%20zionist_plan_for_the_middle_east.htm
Also, the Perle, Feith, Wurmser recommendations to Netanyahu---"Clean Break"-- in 1996 presented the same theme. As you see it was all very accurate. Some critics lambaste the neocons for being off base in their rosy predictions of a democratic Middle East without realizing (or being too afraid to realize) that these were all lies to cover the actual goal of a destabilized Middle East. It would appear that the leading neocons such as Perle were anything but naive babes in the woods but clearly understood what would result from the US war.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 3:51 PM
Subject: FISK: Get America out of Iraq Fast
Subj: FISK: Get America out of Iraq Fast
Date: 1/3/04 12:09:06 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: jblankfort
Jeff, Doesn't this Fisk article (found linked at this URL) sound a lot like what Perle, Wolfowitz and the Mossad wanted for Iraq in the 1970s?:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/articles/index.php | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 9:36 pm Post subject: Fw: List of Traitors |
| http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/12/Counterpunch_1.html
http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html
http://www.nowarforisrael.com
http://nogw.com/warforisrael.html
Subj: Fw: List of Traitors
Date: 1/6/04 8:11:35 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Mikaeel
Be advised & don’t be blind. This is all fact. Read this and draw your own conclusion.
This updated list of traitors came from Australia!!!
It's amazing to me(and no surprise) that people outside the U.S. know more about this government than Americans.
From ReportersNotebook.com
3-28-3
The Israeli lobby has many "thinktanks" that provide future advisors to the various administrations, both Republican and Democrat. During the Clinton Administration, the Israeli lobby provided officials from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy like Martin Indyk. During the Bush Jr Administration, many of the officials the Israeli lobby provided are from their Republican "thinktanks," like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).
1). Richard Perle----One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he is the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle came from one the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktanks, the AEI. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.
2). Paul Wolfowitz----Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz came from the above mentioned Jewish thinktank, JINSA. Wolfowitz is the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering.
3). Douglas Feith----Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith also came from the Jewish thinktank JINSA. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.
4). Edward Luttwak----Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq.
5). Henry Kissinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger likely had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos), Installing Chilean mass murdering dictator Pinochet, Operation Condor's mass killings in South America, and more recently served as Serbia's Ex-Dictator Slobodan Milosevic's Advisor. He consistently advocates going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S. Unfortunately, President Bush nominated Kissinger as chairman of the September 11 investigating commission. It's like picking a bank robber to investigate a fraud scandal.
6). Dov Zakheim----Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) for the Department of Defense. He is an ordained rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended attended Jew's College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York's Jewish Yeshiva University. Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.
7). Kenneth Adelman-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supports going to war against Iraq. Adelman frequently is a guest on Fox News, and often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. Through his hatred or stupidity, he actually called Arabs "anti-Semitic" on Fox News (11/28/2001), when he could have looked it up in the dictionary to find out that Arabs by definition are Semites.
8). I. Lewis Libby -----Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. The chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to invade Iraq. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Mark Rich, whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president.
9). Robert Satloff----U.S. National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.
10). Elliott Abrams-----National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.
11). Marc Grossman-----Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State. Grossman is one of many of the pro-Israel Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.
12). Richard Haass-----Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently advocates going to war against Iraq. Haass is also a member of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.
13). Robert Zoellick-----U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position. He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up setting up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates going to war against Iraq.
14). Ari Fleischer----Official White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president of Chabad's Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.
15). James Schlesinger-----One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supports going to war against Iraq. Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.
16). David Frum-----White House speechwriter behind the "Axis of Evil" label. He lumps together all the lies and accusations against Iraq for Bush to justify the war.
17). Joshua Bolten----White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Bolten was previously a banker, former legislative aide, and prominent in the Jewish community.
18). John Bolton----Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Bolton is also a Senior Advisor to President Bush. Prior to this position, Bolton was Senior Vice President of the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktank, AEI. He recently (October 2002) accused Syria of having a nuclear program, so that they can attack Syria after Iraq. He must have forgotten that Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, some of which are thermonuclear weapons (according to a recent U.S. Air Force report).
19). David Wurmser----Special Assistant to John Bolton (above), the under-secretary for arms control and international security. Wurmser also worked at the AEI with Perle and Bolton. His wife, Meyrav Wurmser, along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence, co-founded the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri),a Washington-based Israeli outfit which distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light.
20). Eliot Cohen-----Member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. Like Adelman, he often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. More recently, he wrote an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal openly admitting his rascist hatred of Islam claiming that Islam should be the enemy, not terrorism.
21). Mel Sembler-----President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems.
22). Michael Chertoff ----Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, at the Justice Department.
23). Steve Goldsmith----Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush's Jewish domestic policy advisor. He also serves as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.
24). Adam Goldman-----White House's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.
25). Joseph Gildenhorn-----Bush Campaign's Special Liaison to the Jewish Community. He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.
26). Christopher Gersten-----Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS. Gersten was the former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Husband of Labor Secretary, Linda Chavez, and reportedly very pro-Israel. Their children are being raised Jewish.
27). Mark Weinberger-----Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Policy.
28). Samuel Bodman-----Deputy Secretary of Commerce. He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.
29). Bonnie Cohen-----Under Secretary of State for Management.
30). Ruth Davis-----Director of Foreign Service Institute, who reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).
31). Lincoln Bloomfield-----Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.
32). Jay Lefkowitz-----General Counsel of the Office of Budget and Management.
33). Ken Melman-----White House Political Director.
34). Brad Blakeman------White House Director of Scheduling.
Peace is patriotic! Michael Santomauro Editorial Director 253 West 72nd street #1711 New York, NY 10023 http://www.RePortersNoteBook.com | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
