| Author | Message | | Guest | | Posted: Fri Oct 25, 2002 8:41 pm Post subject: Re: Wexler |
| | Mort A. Klein wrote: | Unfortunately. Wexler is NOT the ardent supporter of Israel that you claim he is but is an ardent supporter of American politics as shown by his unwavering support for former President Clinton.
Facts are what count and not ad hominem attacks without any justification.
Wexler usually does not join in with pro-Israeli congressmen in any form of legitimate support for Israel and when I asked him about this, he said he prefers to work alone.
As to your claim he is an Orthodox Jew, how does that reconcile with his many visits to Mario's Italian Restaurant in Boca Raton. I hear he enjoys the scungilli.
And your knee jerk reaction that says pro-Israeli activists are for a war in Iraq, nonsence. That's a political statement as in any first strike, Israel would accept massive losses.
Get your facts straight prior to making silly statements. |
Another Zionist truth distorter (in Mr. Klein) who appears to be Jewish as well, so his objectivity looks to be in question when discussing this topic.. I suggest he look at the voting record of Congressman Wexler (and other Zionist Jews and their lackeys in the US government who don't necessarily have to be "Orthodox" to be ardent supporters of Israel's interests before America's) when it comes to whether he has more allegiance to looking after the interests of Israel before America... | |  | | Guest | | | | fig | | Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2002 10:24 pm Post subject: answer |
| | whata bunch of ignorant racists | | | | Guest-c651 | | Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:27 pm Post subject: JINSA Zionist Jew Richard Perle about Iraq 'Regime Change' |
| Richard Perle about "regime change" in Iraq [Worth reading]
iraqicommunity-Message 1665.,Tue Feb 25, 2003.
Worth reading
----------------------------------------
Interview: 'Even if Saddam worked for us it is time for us to throw
him out'
London |By Amir Taheri | 23-02-2003
His political enemies have labelled him "The Prince of Darkness"
while his friends claim that he is one of the "best strategic
brains" in Washington. All agree that Richard Perle, who chairs the
all-powerful Defence Policy Board, is one of the key hands in
shaping President George W. Bush's global strategy.
One of the architects of the policy of "regime change" in Iraq,
Perle plays a crucial behind-the-scenes role in all diplomatic,
political and military aspects of what looks like a deepening crisis.
In an exclusive interview conducted during a recent visit to London,
Perle responded to our questions.
Excerpts:
Question: Some people in the Arab world believe that Saddam Hussain
works for you.
Answer: Why is that?
"It's a long story. But the main theme is that Saddam, by
threatening and sometimes actually invading Iraq's neighbours,
forced many countries in the region to come under the U.S. umbrella
and even invite American military presence. He also waged war
against the revolution in Iran for eight years, helping you contain
that particular enemy at no cost to yourself. The result of all that
is there is now a quarter of a million American troops where there
was none just three decades ago. The U.S. has some military presence
in all but five of the Arab states. And now, by making an unequal
war inevitable, he is just trying to present Iraq to you on a golden
plate..."
A:Interesting analysis. But I can tell you one thing: even if Saddam
worked for us it is time for us to chuck him out. We are not
interested in maintaining troops outside our own territory just for
the fun of it. The United States was not designed or destined to
become an imperial power. You will not find anywhere in the world
where we intervened militarily and set up a colonial empire.
Our problem with Saddam Hussain is twofold. First, he is clearly
determined to build up his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
which he could use against our allies in the region and, later, even
against Europe and the United States. The simple truth is that we
cannot trust him.
Therefore, we cannot turn our face away and let him to do whatever
he likes in violation of the ceasefire accords of 1991 and 18
Security Council resolutions. The second reason for our position is
that we believe the Iraqi people deserve a better government.
Q:Some Arabs believe you want Iraq's oil…
A:The answer to that question will be given by what we shall all see
very soon. Iraqi oil belongs to the people of Iraq and whoever is
prepared to buy it at world prices. Even now the American market
absorbs most of Iraq's oil.
Q:Some Arabs see you as an enemy…
A:They are wrong. Saddam Hussain is not the symbol of Arab dreams,
hopes and aspirations. No one has harmed Arab interests as much as
he has in the past few decades. All that I want is for Arabs to be
able to elect their own governments, hold them accountable.
All I want is for the Arabs to have a robust open market economy so
that they can have a share in the fantastic prosperity created by
the new global economy. Why is it that the Arab countries are
absolutely the only ones whose real income per head has fallen in
the past two decades?
A friend is not one who flatters you and congratulates you for your
weaknesses. A friend is he who criticises you. I want the Arabs to
ask themselves why are they weak and confused? The answer is:
because they are not free. Because they have suffered from leaders
like Saddam Hussain.
Q:Are the Arabs ready for the kind of Western-style system you
preach?
A:I think they are. At least they must be given a chance. When they
had a chance, several Arab countries were slowly building democracy –
among them Iraq and Egypt. And today several Arab states are taking
risks with reform and change. The Arabs have a great culture and
civilisation behind them. So, why should they be shut out of
contemporary civilisation?
Q:So, you think that post-Saddam Iraq will be a model for all Arabs?
A:I don't believe in models. You can never generalise in these
things. Each country has its own traditions, its own dynamism for
reform. It is not for us to tell anyone how to do things. All that
we are saying is that people should not be imprisoned or killed
because of their opinions, that governments should be answerable to
people, and that the national economy is not a thieves' bazaar for
the rulers.
Q:One of your former advisors Laurent Murawiec says that Saudi
Arabia should be regarded as "Enemy Number One" of the United States
and even invaded and carved into five mini-states. Do you agree?
A:No, I don't. Saudi Arabia is a valuable ally. There are aspects of
Saudi policy with which we disagree just as there are aspects of our
policy that the Saudis do not like. So we tell them what we think
and they tell us what they think.
I must also tell you that Saudi Arabia is not a monolith. Not all
Saudis think and behave alike. There is a wide-range of opinion on
all key issues in the kingdom where we have solid friends. The
reform plan proposed by Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdelaziz contains
some interesting suggestions. It could provide the Arabs with a
roadmap for collective change.
Q:There are frequent reports about plans to persuade Saddam Hussain
to step down and go into exile, thus preventing a war.
A:I know. But we will not accept fudge. We will not accept a half
solution under which the Iraqis will end up with a light version of
Saddam. What we are talking about is regime change, not just a
change of personnel.
Saddam is both the cause and the effect of an evil system that has
brought so much suffering to the people of Iraq. That system must
go. If Saddam's departure into exile is the first step to the kind
of change I am talking about, very well. If not, no thanks.
Q:From what you say it seems to me that war has become inevitable…
A:War was never ruled out as an option. But nothing is inevitable
until it has happened. Obviously, the final word must come from
President George W. Bush.
Q:Could it come soon? And how long do you think the war would take?
A:My hunch is that it will come soon. My understanding is that we
can wrap the whole thing in 30 days.
Q:So there is no chance that in November 2004 when there will be
another U.S. presidential election we shall still have Saddam
Hussain in power in Baghdad pointing to the scalp of a second
President Bush on his wall?
A:No chance. Guaranteed.
Q: Will the U.S. go to war even without a second UN resolution?
A:Anyone with a smallest doe of fairness would know that, legally
speaking, we do not need a second resolution. We didn't even need
1441. The Security Council gave Iraq 60 days to disarm back in 1991.
One thing is certain: we will not allow manoeuvrings over a second
resolution to be used as a tactic to buy Saddam more time.
Q:What if France vetoes a second resolution that authorises the use
of force?
A:That won't happen. The last time France vetoed an American
resolution was in 1956. At that time the U.S. wanted French, British
and Israeli forces to immediately evacuate the Sinai that they had
captured from Egypt in the Suez War. The French veto had no real
effect. The U.S. succeeded in making sure that Egyptian territory
was evacuated.
Q:Does this mean the U.S. will ignore a French veto?
A:Certainly. If a veto can dictate our policy then France would be
regarded as the master of the world. In any case, there will be no
French veto. The French know that if they veto we shall ignore them.
They would also know that Saddam Hussain couldn't win. So, what
would be the sense of antagonising a victorious U.S. to please a
losing Saddam?
Q:I don't know. But I can tell you that President Jacques Chirac
seems determined to make life as hard as he can for you. He cannot
accept that the U.S. should have the power to go around changing
regimes it does not like…
A:I don't agree with your analysis. Just before the war starts
France will jump on our side. It has happened all the time, most
recently in Afghanistan. The French behaved in exactly the same way
last time when Saddam had invaded Kuwait.
Let me tell you something more important: the French attitude makes
war more likely. It gives Saddam false hope that things can be
dragged on and on until the next American presidential election.
Thus Saddam sees no reason why he should really show his weapons to
the inspectors.
That gives us the clear reason we need for attacking him. Thus,
Chirac's policy will, in the final analysis, lead to Saddam's
destruction.
Q:Isn't there a subtext to the French position, one linked to French
oil interests in Iraq?
A:The French company Total has signed a $40 billion oil deal with
the Iraqis. Paris is, therefore, anxious to preserve that. But many
Iraqis say the contract is unfair and one-sided. They want it to be
renegotiated in favour of Iraq. But that is not an issue for us. It
is the future Iraqi government that would decide what do with the
country's oil and other resources.
There is no reason why France, which has a long presence in Iraq,
should be excluded from normal and mutually beneficial deals. Let me
repeat that we are not in this for oil. We are in this for something
much more important than oil: our future security and the security
of our allies in the region.
Q:Is there enough Arab support for the American position?
A:More than enough. Not a single Arab state is making the slightest
move against our policy on this issue. And at least a dozen are
actively cooperating with us in whatever field we require.
Q:Could you tell us which ones?
A:No. I am not their spokesman. What interests me is that almost all
Arab states are showing a sense of realism and an understanding of
their own interests on this issue.
Secretary of State Colin Powell told us recently in Davos that the
U.S. had 12 allies in the coming war…
As soon as it becomes clear that we are going to war we shall have
plenty of allies. But even if we didn't have a single ally, we would
still do what needs to be done. One way or another, and sooner
rather than later, Saddam Hussain must go, that's the message.
Q:Who will be your next target? Iran, Syria, Libya?
Change is needed in all those three countries, and a few others
besides. But the Iraqi case is unique. I think Iran can be changed
by the action of the Iranian people. We shall provide whatever
support they need to ensure the success of the reform movement.
I believe that Syria, too, can organise change from within. As for
Libya, it is a weird case. For the time being it is out of world
reality. But the colonel knows that we have our eyes on him.
Q:In Davos, Colin Powell told us that there would be a Palestinian
state by 2005...
A:2005 is a long way off. Once the Iraqi situation is settled we can
move faster. The president's "two-states" vision is already clear.
We also have a road map. We are convinced that, without the
settlement of the Palestinian issue, new political architecture of
the Middle East would not be possible.
Q:Can the U.S. handle the Iraqi conflict and the North Koran crisis
at the same time?
A:Certainly. For the past 20 years we have worked on a strategy that
enables us to fight at least two major wars simultaneously. We are
not going to let North Korea off the hook simply because we are
working to get rid of Saddam.
Q:Do you plan to impose a military occupation of Iraq?
A:No. Our first task is to topple the dictatorship and destroy its
weapons. We shall then have the task of ensuring security and law
and order for a brief period during which the new Iraqi government
establishes itself and rebuilds its police and armed forces.
The Iraqis will have the opportunity to have a new constitution,
hold elections and produce a government of their own choosing. Once
that government asks us to leave, we shall leave.
Q:So, all this talk about an American ruler for Iraq is out of
place? I have heard many names including Colin Powell and even
former Senator George Mitchell...
A:Mitchell? You must be kidding. No, Iraq does not need an American
ruler. We had to assume direct rule in Germany and Japan after the
Second World War because there were no alternative forces in those
countries at the time.
The majority of the Germans had supported Hitler and the majority of
the Japanese had endorsed the policies of their military rulers. In
Iraq, however, the majority is against Saddam Hussain. There are
Iraqis from all shades of opinion to come together and create a
pluralist system.
You can have two-dozen political parties covering the whole spectrum
in Iraq. There are also many competent, experienced, well-educated
and dedicated Iraqis to assume control of their country and rebuild
it. They won't need an American ruler. Iraq is to be a model of
democracy, not a model of American military rule.
Q:A word about Turkey and Iran. Do you have their support?
A:As much as needed. Turkey is an ally, and Iran knows what it must
do.
Q:Nevertheless, the Turks are making noises about the Treaty of
Lausanne that gives them the so-called "right of observance" in
northern Iraq, especially in the oil regions of Mosul and Kirkuk.
Iran, for its part, talks about the Erzerum Treaty that gives Tehran
some say in the affairs of the Shiite holy shrines in southern Iraq.
A:I don't know about all that. All I can say is that we shall not
allow anyone to threaten Iraq's independence, territorial integrity
and full sovereignty. Turkey has received assurances about the
Turkmen minority in northern Iraq.
It is also aware of the fact that it cannot create an empire in
northern Iraq. As for Iran, whatever the Shiites do about their
shrines is their private matter. The new Iraqi government will not
allow any foreign intervention.
Q:What is the timetable? Would there be a new Iraqi regime in time
for the Arab summit, perhaps in spring?
A:Why not? | | | | Guest-43e1 | | Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:22 pm Post subject: ( ) |
| Jerry Falwell: "The Ant-Christ is probably a Jewish man living in America".
Pearly-Girl: "God is a Zionist"
"The American people are stupid sheep."
"Bush is a useful idiot"
"Those who fought and died in Vietnam were fools"
"It would be good if every country on earth would exist solely to make a lot of money for Jewish businesses"
If millions of Arabs have to be eliminated to make that happen, so be it."
"If millions of Americans have to die to make that happen, so be it."
"When I wave the flag, the dumb goyim are convinced"
"They love me on TV"
"A Starbucks, and Bed, Bath & Beyond on every corner of the world".
"I always thought Christ was a wimp who was bad for the Jews"
"I love the smell of death in the morning, but only if I can read about it, I really have never seen anyone die, and I don't like funerals".
"I hate all people except for Jews who support my policies"
"If you criticize me for using America to annihilate Israel's enemies, I will have the media descend upon you, and blast you as "anti-semites".
"Most Jews, even the ones who think I'm wicked and odious, will either say nothing, or jump on anyone who criticizes me as an "anti-semite".
"Remember, if anyone dares mention that its my Jewish sympathies for Israel that are my primary consideration, or even says the word "Zionist", they will quickly be condemned by a compliant media, luckily dominated by Jews, who shun any and all criticism of Jews".
"Is this a great country, or what?" | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
