| Author | Message | | Guest-400c | | Posted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 9:53 pm Post subject: "The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel" |
| "The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel."
Dear Friend of The Last Ditch:
I'm delighted to announce that I've just posted a new masterpiece by Dr.
Stephen J. Sniegoski: "The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel."
The direct URL is http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/conc_toc.htm
If you'd like to read it framed in the usual TLD wrappings, hit our home
URL at:
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch
and proceed from there.
This piece deserves much attention.
Regards,
Nicholas Strakon
TLD | |  | | Guest-400c | | Posted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 9:59 pm Post subject: Washington Post: JINSA Zionist Extremists PUSH US to WAR |
| Washington Post Article: JINSA Zionist Extremists PUSH US to War
Date: 2/10/03 1:05:34 PM Pacific Standard Time
Bush and Sharon Nearly Identical On Mideast Policy (Washington Post article from yesterday about JINSA Zionist extremist Cabal that has Hijacked the Bush regime and is PUSHING US to launch the coming war on Islam for greater Israel and oil):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/02/10/bush-and-sharon-nearly-identical-on-mideast-policy.php
JINSA (Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs) Planned Iraq 'Regime Change' before Bush Presidency:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/12/31/bush-planned-iraq-regime-change-before-becoming-president.php
Colin Powell Used Plagiarized Student Essay at UN:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uk-and-europe/2003/02/07/colin-powell-used-plagiarized-student-essay-at-un.php
JINSA Zionist Extremist Richard Perle: 'Inspections Or Not, We'll Attack Iraq':
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/11/24/zionist-richard-perle-inspections-or-not-we-ll-attack-iraq.php
CIA SAYS NO TO IRAQ WAR:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/02/10/cia-says-no-to-iraq-war.php
MI6 And CIA: The New Enemy Within:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/02/10/mi6-and-cia-the-new-enemy-within.php
The Return of Zionist Extremist Elliott Abrams (who is mentioned in the above referenced Washington Post article):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/04/return-of-zionist-extremist-elliott-abrams.php
The Psychotic Hawks of the Bush Administration are a Threat:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uk-and-europe/2003/01/21/the-psychotic-hawks-of-the-bush-administration-are-a-threat.php
JINSA Zionist (David Frum) Wrote "Axis of Evil" Mention for President Bush:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/02/08/jinsa-jewish-zionist-wrote-axis-of-evil-speech.php
JINSA Zionists PUSHING US to War for Israel and Oil:
http://books.guardian.co.uk/lrb/articles/0,6109,811747,00.html
Breaking the Silence on the Israeli Lobby:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/12/31/breaking-the-silence-on-the-israel-lobby.php
Bush is intent on painting allies and enemies in the Middle East as evil:
http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=332011
By Robert Fisk
10 September 2002
Just as Americans are recovering from the harrowing television re-runs of the 11 September attacks, their President is going to launch the biggest reshaping of the Middle East since the British and French parcelled out the Arab lands after the 1914-18 war. When he addresses the United Nations on Thursday, George Bush will be threatening not only Iraq – which had absolutely nothing to do with the crimes against humanity in New York and Washington – but Syria, Iran and, by extension, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.The Syrian Accountability Act, which accuses Damascus of supporting "terrorism", will come into force as President Bush is speaking and will follow only days after the State Department branded the Lebanese Hizbollah as the "A-team of terrorism", more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'ida. Like Iraq, the Hizbollah had nothing to do with the 11 September attacks – indeed, they were among the first to condemn them – but the White House now seems set on painting allies and enemies alike in the Middle East as a focus of evil.Only The Nation among all of America's newspapers and magazines has dared to point out that a large number of former Israeli lobbyists are now working within the American administration and the Bush plans for the Middle East – which could cause a massive political upheaval in the Arab world – fit perfectly into Israel's own dreams for the region. The magazine listed Vice-President Dick Cheney – the arch-hawk in the US administration – and John Bolton, now under-secretary of state for Arms Control, with Douglas Feith, the third most senior executive at the Pentagon, as members of the advisory board of the pro-Israeli Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (Jinsa) before joining the Bush government. Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board, is still an adviser on the institute, as is the former CIA director James Woolsey.Michael Ledeen, described by The Nation as "one of the most influential 'Jinsans' in Washington" has been calling for "total war" against "terror" – with "regime change" for Syria, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority. Mr Perle advises the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld – who refers to the West Bank and Gaza as "the so-called occupied territories" – and arranged the anti-Saudi "kernel of evil" briefing by Laurent Murawiec that so outraged the Saudi royal family last month. The Saudi regime may itself be in great danger as the princes of the House of Saud attempt to seize more power for themselves in advance of the depart-ure of the dying King Fahd. Jinsa's website says it exists to "inform the American defence and foreign affairs community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East". Next month, Michael Rubin of the right-wing and pro-Israeli American Enterprise Institute – who referred to the outgoing UN human rights commissioner Mary Robinson as an abettor of "terrorism" – joins the US Defence Department as an Iran-Iraq "expert".According to The Nation, Irving Moskovitz, the California bingo magnate who has funded settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories, is a donor as well as a director of Jinsa. President Bush, of course, will not be talking about the influence of these pro-Israeli lobbyists when he presents his vision of the Middle East at the United Nations on Thursday. Nor will he give the slightest indication that the region is, in the words of its own kings and dictators, a powder keg of resentment and anger. The tectonic plates of the Arab world are now grinding with increasing violence. Into this political earthquake zone, Mr Bush now seems intent on leading his country, with his loyal British ally. Most of today's Arab nations were fashioned out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire by Britain and France in the aftermath of the First World War – and Palestinians still blame Britain today for supporting the formation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Both European nations stationed tens of thousands of troops across the region, suppressing Arab revolts in Palestine, Syria and Lebanon – itself created by the French at the request of its Christian Maronite community. The whole colonial framework led to the loss of tens of thousands of lives before both the British and French retreated from the Middle East.Now President Bush seems set on following the colonial powers into the region for another military and political adventure – ostensibly to spread "democracy" among those nations it most despises (Iraq, Palestine and Iran) but in fact more likely to increase American control of an increasingly anti-Western Arab world.The Arabs themselves warn that this will lead to massive instability and widespread violence. The Israelis – and their allies in the US administration – are hell bent on the whole shebang.
Included below is that "Men from JINSA and CSP" article from "The Nation" magazine which Mr. Fisk mentions in his article referenced above:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest&c=1
The Men From JINSA and CSP
by JASON VEST
[from the September 2, 2002 issue of "The Nation" magazine in the USA]
The Men From JINSA and CSP
by JASON VEST
[from the September 2, 2002 issue]
Almost thirty years ago, a prominent group of neoconservative hawks found an effective vehicle for advocating their views via the Committee on the Present Danger, a group that fervently believed the United States was a hair away from being militarily surpassed by the Soviet Union, and whose raison d'être was strident advocacy of bigger military budgets, near-fanatical opposition to any form of arms control and zealous championing of a Likudnik Israel. Considered a marginal group in its nascent days during the Carter Administration, with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 CPD went from the margins to the center of power. Just as the right-wing defense intellectuals made CPD a cornerstone of a shadow defense establishment during the Carter Administration, so, too, did the right during the Clinton years, in part through two organizations: the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Center for Security Policy (CSP). And just as was the case two decades ago, dozens of their members have ascended to powerful government posts, where their advocacy in support of the same agenda continues, abetted by the out-of-government adjuncts from which they came. Industrious and persistent, they've managed to weave a number of issues--support for national missile defense, opposition to arms control treaties, championing of wasteful weapons systems, arms aid to Turkey and American unilateralism in general--into a hard line, with support for the Israeli right at its core. On no issue is the JINSA/CSP hard line more evident than in its relentless campaign for war--not just with Iraq, but "total war," as Michael Ledeen, one of the most influential JINSAns in Washington, put it last year. For this crew, "regime change" by any means necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority is an urgent imperative. Anyone who dissents--be it Colin Powell's State Department, the CIA or career military officers--is committing heresy against articles of faith that effectively hold there is no difference between US and Israeli national security interests, and that the only way to assure continued safety and prosperity for both countries is through hegemony in the Middle East--a hegemony achieved with the traditional cold war recipe of feints, force, clientism and covert action. For example, the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board--chaired by JINSA/CSP adviser and former Reagan Administration Defense Department official Richard Perle, and stacked with advisers from both groups--recently made news by listening to a briefing that cast Saudi Arabia as an enemy to be brought to heel through a number of potential mechanisms, many of which mirror JINSA's recommendations, and which reflect the JINSA/CSP crowd's preoccupation with Egypt. (The final slide of the Defense Policy Board presentation proposed that "Grand Strategy for the Middle East" should concentrate on "Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot [and] Egypt as the prize.") Ledeen has been leading the charge for regime change in Iran, while old comrades like Andrew Marshall and Harold Rhode in the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment actively tinker with ways to re-engineer both the Iranian and Saudi governments. JINSA is also cheering the US military on as it tries to secure basing rights in the strategic Red Sea country of Eritrea, happily failing to mention that the once-promising secular regime of President Isaiais Afewerki continues to slide into the kind of repressive authoritarianism practiced by the "axis of evil" and its adjuncts. Indeed, there are some in military and intelligence circles who have taken to using "axis of evil" in reference to JINSA and CSP, along with venerable repositories of hawkish thinking like the American Enterprise Institute and the Hudson Institute, as well as defense contractors, conservative foundations and public relations entities underwritten by far-right American Zionists (all of which help to underwrite JINSA and CSP). It's a milieu where ideology and money seamlessly blend: "Whenever you see someone identified in print or on TV as being with the Center for Security Policy or JINSA championing a position on the grounds of ideology or principle--which they are unquestionably doing with conviction--you are, nonetheless, not informed that they're also providing a sort of cover for other ideologues who just happen to stand to profit from hewing to the Likudnik and Pax Americana lines," says a veteran intelligence officer. He notes that while the United States has begun a phaseout of civilian aid to Israel that will end by 2007, government policy is to increase military aid by half the amount of civilian aid that's cut each year--which is not only a boon to both the US and Israeli weapons industries but is also crucial to realizing the far right's vision for missile defense and the Middle East. Founded in 1976 by neoconservatives concerned that the United States might not be able to provide Israel with adequate military supplies in the event of another Arab-Israeli war, over the past twenty-five years JINSA has gone from a loose-knit proto-group to a $1.4-million-a-year operation with a formidable array of Washington power players on its rolls. Until the beginning of the current Bush Administration, JINSA's board of advisers included such heavy hitters as Dick Cheney, John Bolton (now Under Secretary of State for Arms Control) and Douglas Feith, the third-highest-ranking executive in the Pentagon. Both Perle and former Director of Central Intelligence James Woolsey, two of the loudest voices in the attack-Iraq chorus, are still on the board, as are such Reagan-era relics as Jeane Kirkpatrick, Eugene Rostow and Ledeen--Oliver North's Iran/contra liaison with the Israelis. According to its website, JINSA exists to "educate the American public about the importance of an effective US defense capability so that our vital interests as Americans can be safeguarded" and to "inform the American defense and foreign affairs community about the important role Israel can and does play in bolstering democratic interests in the Mediterranean and the Middle East." In practice, this translates into its members producing a steady stream of op-eds and reports that have been good indicators of what the Pentagon's civilian leadership is thinking. JINSA relishes denouncing virtually any type of contact between the US government and Syria and finding new ways to demonize the Palestinians. To give but one example (and one that kills two birds with one stone): According to JINSA, not only is Yasir Arafat in control of all violence in the occupied territories, but he orchestrates the violence solely "to protect Saddam.... Saddam is at the moment Arafat's only real financial supporter.... [Arafat] has no incentive to stop the violence against Israel and allow the West to turn its attention to his mentor and paymaster." And if there's a way to advance other aspects of the far-right agenda by intertwining them with Israeli interests, JINSA doesn't hesitate there, either. A recent report contends that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge must be tapped because "the Arab oil-producing states" are countries "with interests inimical to ours," but Israel "stand[s] with us when we need [Israel]," and a US policy of tapping oil under ANWR will "limit [the Arabs'] ability to do damage to either of us." The bulk of JINSA's modest annual budget is spent on taking a bevy of retired US generals and admirals to Israel, where JINSA facilitates meetings between Israeli officials and the still-influential US flag officers, who, upon their return to the States, happily write op-eds and sign letters and advertisements championing the Likudnik line. (Sowing seeds for the future, JINSA also takes US service academy cadets to Israel each summer and sponsors a lecture series at the Army, Navy and Air Force academies.) In one such statement, issued soon after the outbreak of the latest intifada, twenty-six JINSAns of retired flag rank, including many from the advisory board, struck a moralizing tone, characterizing Palestinian violence as a "perversion of military ethics" and holding that "America's role as facilitator in this process should never yield to America's responsibility as a friend to Israel," as "friends don't leave friends on the battlefield." However high-minded this might sound, the postservice associations of the letter's signatories--which are almost always left off the organization's website and communiqués--ought to require that the phrase be amended to say "friends don't leave friends on the battlefield, especially when there's business to be done and bucks to be made." Almost every retired officer who sits on JINSA's board of advisers or has participated in its Israel trips or signed a JINSA letter works or has worked with military contractors who do business with the Pentagon and Israel. While some keep a low profile as self-employed "consultants" and avoid mention of their clients, others are less shy about their associations, including with the private mercenary firm Military Professional Resources International, weapons broker and military consultancy Cypress International and SY Technology, whose main clients include the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency, which oversees several ongoing joint projects with Israel. The behemoths of military contracting are also well represented in JINSA's ranks. For example, JINSA advisory board members Adm. Leon Edney, Adm. David Jeremiah and Lieut. Gen. Charles May, all retired, have served Northrop Grumman or its subsidiaries as either consultants or board members. Northrop Grumman has built ships for the Israeli Navy and sold F-16 avionics and E-2C Hawkeye planes to the Israeli Air Force (as well as the Longbow radar system to the Israeli army for use in its attack helicopters). It also works with Tamam, a subsidiary of Israeli Aircraft Industries, to produce an unmanned aerial vehicle. Lockheed Martin has sold more than $2 billion worth of F-16s to Israel since 1999, as well as flight simulators, multiple-launch rocket systems and Seahawk heavyweight torpedoes. At one time or another, General May, retired Lieut. Gen. Paul Cerjan and retired Adm. Carlisle Trost have labored in LockMart's vineyards. Trost has also sat on the board of General Dynamics, whose Gulfstream subsidiary has a $206 million contract to supply planes to Israel to be used for "special electronics missions." By far the most profitably diversified of the JINSAns is retired Adm. David Jeremiah. President and partner of Technology Strategies & Alliances Corporation (described as a "strategic advisory firm and investment banking firm engaged primarily in the aerospace, defense, telecommunications and electronics industries"), Jeremiah also sits on the boards of Northrop Grumman's Litton subsidiary and of defense giant Alliant Techsystems, which--in partnership with Israel's TAAS--does a brisk business in rubber bullets. And he has a seat on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, chaired by Perle. About the only major defense contractor without a presence on JINSA's advisory board is Boeing, which has had a relationship with Israeli Aircraft Industries for thirty years. (Boeing also sells F-15s to Israel and, in partnership with Lockheed Martin, Apache attack helicopters, a ubiquitous weapon in the occupied territories.) But take a look at JINSA's kindred spirit in things pro-Likud and pro-Star Wars, the Center for Security Policy, and there on its national security advisory council are Stanley Ebner, a former Boeing executive; Andrew Ellis, vice president for government relations; and Carl Smith, a former staff director of the Senate Armed Services Committee who, as a lawyer in private practice, has counted Boeing among his clients. "JINSA and CSP," says a veteran Pentagon analyst, "may as well be one and the same." Not a hard sell: There's always been considerable overlap beween the JINSA and CSP rosters--JINSA advisers Jeane Kirkpatrick, Richard Perle and Phyllis Kaminsky also serve on CSP's advisory council; current JINSA advisory board chairman David Steinmann sits on CSP's board of directors; and before returning to the Pentagon Douglas Feith served as the board's chair. At this writing, twenty-two CSP advisers--including additional Reagan-era remnants like Elliott Abrams, Ken deGraffenreid, Paula Dobriansky, Sven Kraemer, Robert Joseph, Robert Andrews and J.D. Crouch--have reoccupied key positions in the national security establishment, as have other true believers of more recent vintage. While CSP boasts an impressive advisory list of hawkish luminaries, its star is Frank Gaffney, its founder, president and CEO. A protégé of Perle going back to their days as staffers for the late Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson (a k a the Senator from Boeing, and the Senate's most zealous champion of Israel in his day), Gaffney later joined Perle at the Pentagon, only to be shown the door by Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci in 1987, not long after Perle left. Gaffney then reconstituted the latest incarnation of the Committee on the Present Danger. Beyond compiling an A-list of influential conservative hawks, Gaffney has been prolific over the past fifteen years, churning out a constant stream of reports (as well as regular columns for the Washington Times) making the case that the gravest threats to US national security are China, Iraq, still-undeveloped ballistic missiles launched by rogue states, and the passage of or adherence to virtually any form of arms control treaty. Gaffney and CSP's prescriptions for national security have been fairly simple: Gut all arms control treaties, push ahead with weapons systems virtually everyone agrees should be killed (such as the V-22 Osprey), give no quarter to the Palestinians and, most important, go full steam ahead on just about every national missile defense program. (CSP was heavily represented on the late-1990s Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, which was instrumental in keeping the program alive during the Clinton years.) Looking at the center's affiliates, it's not hard to see why: Not only are makers of the Osprey (Boeing) well represented on the CSP's board of advisers but so too is Lockheed Martin (by vice president for space and strategic missiles Charles Kupperman and director of defense systems Douglas Graham). Former TRW executive Amoretta Hoeber is also a CSP adviser, as is former Congressman and Raytheon lobbyist Robert Livingston. Ball Aerospace & Technologies--a major manufacturer of NASA and Pentagon satellites--is represented by former Navy Secretary John Lehman, while missile-defense computer systems maker Hewlett-Packard is represented by George Keyworth, who is on its board of directors. And the Congressional Missile Defense Caucus and Osprey (or "tilt rotor") caucus are represented by Representative Curt Weldon and Senator Jon Kyl. CSP was instrumental in developing the arguments against the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Largely ignored or derided at the time, a 1995 CSP memo co-written by Douglas Feith holding that the United States should withdraw from the ABM treaty has essentially become policy, as have other CSP reports opposing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention and the International Criminal Court. But perhaps the most insightful window on the JINSA/CSP policy worldview comes in the form of a paper Perle and Feith collaborated on in 1996 with six others under the auspices of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Essentially an advice letter to ascendant Israeli politician Benjamin Netanyahu, "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" makes for insightful reading as a kind of US-Israeli neoconservative manifesto. The paper's first prescription was for an Israeli rightward economic shift, with tax cuts and a selloff of public lands and enterprises--moves that would also engender support from a "broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders." But beyond economics, the paper essentially reads like a blueprint for a mini-cold war in the Middle East, advocating the use of proxy armies for regime changes, destabilization and containment. Indeed, it even goes so far as to articulate a way to advance right-wing Zionism by melding it with missile-defense advocacy. "Mr. Netanyahu can highlight his desire to cooperate more closely with the United States on anti-missile defense in order to remove the threat of blackmail which even a weak and distant army can pose to either state," it reads. "Not only would such cooperation on missile defense counter a tangible physical threat to Israel's survival, but it would broaden Israel's base of support among many in the United States Congress who may know little about Israel, but care very much about missile defense"--something that has the added benefit of being "helpful in the effort to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem." Recent months in Washington have shown just how influential the notions propagated by JINSA and CSP are--and how disturbingly zealous their advocates are. In early March Feith vainly attempted to get the CIA to keep former intelligence officers Milt Bearden and Frank Anderson from accepting an invitation to an Afghanistan-related meeting with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld at the Pentagon--not because of what the two might say about Afghanistan, according to sources familiar with the incident, but likely out of fear that Anderson, a veteran Arabist and former chief of the CIA's Near East division, would proffer his views on Iraq (opposed to invading) and Israel-Palestine (a fan of neither Arafat nor Sharon). In late June, after United Press International reported on a US Muslim civil liberties group's lambasting of Gaffney for his attacks on the American Muslim Council, Gaffney, according to a fellow traveler, "went berserk," launching a stream of invective about the UPI scribe who reported the item. It's incidents like this, say knowledgeable observers and participants, that highlight an interesting dynamic among right-wing hawks at the moment. Though the general agenda put forth by JINSA and CSP continues to be reflected in councils of war, even some of the hawks (including Rumsfeld deputy Paul Wolfowitz) are growing increasingly leery of Israel's settlements policy and Gaffney's relentless support for it. Indeed, his personal stock in Bush Administration circles is low. "Gaffney has worn out his welcome by being an overbearing gadfly rather than a serious contributor to policy," says a senior Pentagon political official. Since earlier this year, White House political adviser Karl Rove has been casting about for someone to start a new, more mainstream defense group that would counter the influence of CSP. According to those who have communicated with Rove on the matter, his quiet efforts are in response to complaints from many conservative activists who feel let down by Gaffney, or feel he's too hard on President Bush. "A lot of us have taken [Gaffney] at face value over the years," one influential conservative says. "Yet we now know he's pushed for some of the most flawed missile defense and conventional systems. He considered Cuba a 'classic asymmetric threat' but not Al Qaeda. And since 9/11, he's been less concerned with the threat to America than to Israel." Gaffney's operation has always been a small one, about $1 million annually--funded largely by a series of grants from the conservative Olin, Bradley and various Scaife foundations, as well as some defense contractor money--but he's recently been able to underwrite a TV and print ad campaign holding that the Palestinians should be Enemy Number One in the War on Terror, still obsessed with the destruction of Israel. It's here that one sees the influence not of defense contractor money but of far-right Zionist dollars, including some from Irving Moskowitz, the California bingo magnate. A donor to both CSP and JINSA (as well as a JINSA director), Moskowitz not only sends millions of dollars a year to far-right Israeli settler groups like Ateret Cohanim but he has also funded the construction of settlements, having bought land for development in key Arab areas around Jerusalem. Moskowitz ponied up the money that enabled the 1996 reopening of a tunnel under the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif, which resulted in seventy deaths due to rioting. Also financing Gaffney's efforts is New York investment banker Lawrence Kadish. A valued and valuable patron of both the Republican National Committee and George W. Bush, Kadish helps underwrite CSP as well as Americans for Victory Over Terrorism, an offshoot of conservative activist William Bennett's Empower America, on which he and Gaffney serve as "senior advisers" in the service of identifying "external" and "internal" post-9/11 threats to America. (The "internal" threats, as articulated by AVOT, include former President Jimmy Carter, Harper's editor Lewis Lapham and Representative Maxine Waters.) Another of Gaffney's backers is Poju Zabludowicz, heir to a formidable diversified international empire that includes arms manufacturer Soltam--which once employed Perle--and benefactor of the recently established Britain Israel Communication and Research Centre, a London-based group that appears to equate reportage or commentary uncomplimentary to Zionism with anti-Semitism. While a small but growing number of conservatives are voicing concerns about various aspects of foreign and defense policy--ranging from fear of overreach to lack of Congressional debate--the hawks seem to be ruling the roost. Beginning in October, hard-line American Enterprise Institute scholar Michael Rubin (to Rubin, outgoing UN human rights chief Mary Robinson is an abettor of terrorism) arrives at the Pentagon to take over the Defense Department's Iran-Iraq account, adding another voice to the Pentagon section of Ledeen's "total war" chorus. Colin Powell's State Department continues to take a beating from outside and inside--including Bolton and his special assistant David Wurmser. (An AEI scholar and far-right Zionist who's married to Meyrav Wurmser of the Middle East Media Research Institute--recently the subject of a critical investigation by London Guardian Middle East editor Brian Whitaker--Wurmser played a key role in crafting the "Arafat must go" policy that many career specialists see as a problematic sop to Ariel Sharon.) As for Rumsfeld, based on comments made at a Pentagon "town hall" meeting on August 6, there seems to be little doubt as to whose comments are resonating most with him--and not just on missile defense and overseas adventures: After fielding a question about Israeli-Palestinian issues, he repeatedly referred to the "so-called occupied territories" and casually characterized the Israeli policy of building Jewish-only enclaves on Palestinian land as "mak[ing] some settlement in various parts of the so-called occupied area," with which Israel can do whatever it wants, as it has "won" all its wars with various Arab entities--essentially an echo of JINSA's stated position that "there is no Israeli occupation." Ominously, Rumsfeld's riff gave a ranking Administration official something of a chill: "I realized at that point," he said, "that on settlements--where there are cleavages on the right--Wolfowitz may be to the left of Rumsfeld."
Turkey, Israel and the US (JINSA Zionist Extremists Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz mentioned in this article as well):
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest20020823
Beyond Regime Change, New 'Old Sykes-Picot Agreement:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/20/beyond-regime-change-new-old-sykes-picot-agreement.php
JINSA Behind Drive To Cover-Up Israeli Spy Scandal:
http://www.rense.com/general18/JINSA.htm
PNAC Group: The List of Players:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/31/pnac-group-the-list-of-players.php
Too Many Smoking Guns to Ignore:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/28/too-many-smoking-guns-to-ignore-israel-us-jews-iraq.php
Oil Shouldn't Be the Only Reason for Opposing This War:
http://www.counterpunch.com/christison01212003.html
Bush Plans to Re-Draw Map of Arabia
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/02/07/bush-plans-to-re-draw-map-of-arabia.php
Washington Post article: Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty (US Double Standard with Iraq):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uss-liberty/2003/02/01/the-attack-on-the-uss-liberty.php
BBC 'Dead in the Water' Documentary (about USS Liberty attack) to Show in D.C.
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uk-and-europe/2003/02/06/bbc-dead-in-the-water-about-uss-liberty-to-show.php
9/11 Hijacker Attended US Military School:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2002/12/31/9-11-hijacker-attended-us-military-school.php
Israeli Mossad Assassinations on American Soil
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/21/israeli-mossad-assassinations-on-american-us-soil.php
The coffee table war:
http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=373317
War Without End Message Board (Click on "War on Terror" after Arriving to get to the 'Israel' and 'UK Involvement in War' message boards via the following URL):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2003 4:38 am Post subject: JINSA Lackey Rumsfeld Tie is First Victim of War |
| From the London Daily Telegraph
news.telegraph.co.uk
Rumsfeld family tie is first victim of war
By Tony Paterson
(Filed: 09/02/2003)
The American defence chief Donald Rumsfeld has been disowned by his
anti-war relatives in north Germany, reports Tony Paterson
The Rumsfelds of Weyhe-Sudweyhe, an unremarkable red-brick suburb of
Bremen, were once proud of their long-lost cousin, America's
secretary of state for defence - but no longer.
Like many Germans, they are appalled by Donald Rumsfeld's hawkish
attitude to military action against Saddam Hussein. About 18,000
anti-war demonstrators marched through Munich yesterday to protest
at his presence at an international security conference - chanting
slogans such as "No room for Rumsfeld!"
"We think it is dreadful that Donald Rumsfeld is out there pushing
for a war against Iraq," Karin Cecere (nee Rumsfeld), 59, said from
her two-up, two-down home last week. "We are embarrassed to be
related to him," she told The Telegraph.
Margarete Rumsfeld, her 85-year-old mother, was equally
dismissive: "We don't have much to do with him anymore. Nowadays
he's just the American defence secretary to us, but for God's sake,
he'd better not start a war," she added.
They used to feel differently. Twenty-five years ago, the German
Rumsfelds were thrilled to welcome Mr Rumsfeld - then the United
States ambassador to Nato stationed in Brussels - into their
extended family.
Like many Americans keen to trace their European antecedents, Mr
Rumsfeld had made contact with the Weyhe-Sudweyhe Rumsfelds, a
branch of the family with whom his near relations had lost touch
since his great-great-grandfather, Heinrich, emigrated to America
during the 19th century.
Mr Rumsfeld paid three visits to Dietrich Rumsfeld, a bricklayer,
and his wife Margarete in their small artisan's cottage. On the last
occasion, they greeted him with chicken soup and roast pork for
lunch "It was a really pleasant family gathering, almost like a
wedding," said Mrs Cecere last week. "Mr Rumsfeld seemed a genuinely
nice man. It is such a shame about his war ambitions."
She had grown up, she said, during the Second World War and her
instincts were to search for a solution to the deadlock with Saddam
that did not involve military action. "I was born in the war and saw
its aftermath, and my mother went through it," she said. "There must
be a peaceful way of solving the Iraq problem."
This change of heart over their Rumsfeld cousin reflects the mood in
Germany. More than 60 per cent of Germans oppose a war and the US
defence secretary has become a hate figure for the country's peace
movement.
His desire to topple Saddam by force is at odds with the Social
Democrat-led government of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, which is
directly opposed to war in Iraq.
Even before his arrival in Germany yesterday, Mr Rumsfeld had faced
fierce criticism from senior German government officials for
describing France and Germany as "old Europe".
Last week he caused further outrage when he told the House Armed
Services Committee in Washington that Germany, like "Libya and
Cuba", had indicated that it "did not want to help in any way" the
international efforts to tackle Iraq.
The German government attempted to play down the criticism. "Mr
Rumsfeld is like he is. I can say no more," said Joschka Fischer,
the foreign minister. Other senior politicians were more
explicit. "Rumsfeld has flipped out - his behaviour is impossible,"
said Klaus Kinkel, a Free Democrat and former foreign minister.
Some Germans have misgivings, however, that their country's hard
line against war with Iraq may backfire - especially if, as widely
predicted, France drops its own objections at the last minute and
joins in military action.
Angela Merkel, the leader of the Christian Democrats, yesterday
became the first opposition figure to call for Germany to become
involved. "If it is impossible to solve the situation peacefully
then Germany has to take part in a military operation," she said,
accusing Mr Schröder's government of "spreading ill-will and
confusion" in Nato.
In Munich Mr Rumsfeld sought to dispel the furore over his own
comments by claiming that he had intended the phrase "old Europe" as
a term of affection, like that of "old friends".
He admitted that he was sometimes inclined to be blunt - but blamed
it on his German roots. "My family originates from northern Germany.
People there are well known for their direct and clear manner of
speaking."
His explanation did not impress most Germans - least of all his
cousins in Weyhe-Sudweyhe. Mrs Cecere said: "We're all in favour of
plain-speaking but our relation goes just too far."
_________________ | | | | Alpha | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | Guest-c651 | | Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2003 11:13 am Post subject: US Ask Israel Delegation to Cancel Visit |
| Subj: [Fwd: US Ask Israel Delegation to Cancel Visit
Date: 2/10/03 6:56:44 PM Pacific Standard Time
This is very interesting. The Bush administration may be leery of
approving this on the eve of the war because it would call unwanted
attention to US favoritism towards as Israel, as if that wasn't known.
What we can expect, however, is that the Israel lobby, unless it is
party to this agreement, will energize its bunnies among the Republican
senate to complain that Bush is wavering towards Israel as it did when
Bush called on Sharon to leave Jenin last Spring, causing Bush to back
down.
Jeff Blankfort
ttp://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/261476.html
U.S. cancels talks with senior Israeli officials
on aid package
By Lior Kagan, Moti Bassok and Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correpsondents
The United States requested Monday that a delegation of senior Israeli officials cancel their trip to Washington for talks on an aid package Israel is requesting from the U.S.
The officials, including head of the Prime Minister's Office, Dov Weisglass and Director-General of the Finance Ministry, Ohad Marani were to depart Tuesday night.
The trip was canceled because the Americans said that they were not prepared at this stage to continue the discussions. No date was set to resume talks on the aid request.
Israel has asked for $4 billion in defense aid and $8 billion in loan guarantees over the next four years.
After several rounds of talks, estimates in Israel were that the matter would be decided upon soon, with the U.S. responding positively to Israel's request and most of the funds arriving by the spring.
Before the cancelation, senior government officials in Jerusalem said the United States administration asked to hold the meeting now, since it wanted to submit the package to Congress for approval in the near future.
The Israeli delegation was to show the administration the government's economic program for the coming year and its proposals for structural reform of the economy. According to the Israeli sources, the loan guarantees will enable Israel to raise $32 billion in overseas loans, which will be used for investment in infrastructure, including roads, railroads, communications and energy.
As with the loan guarantees that Israel received from the United States in 1992, every dollar that Israel spends on the settlements will be deducted from that year's guarantees. But the government sources said these deductions will be minimal, since currently there is nearly no government investment in the settlements. In the 1990s, there was a great deal of investment over the Green Line, because about one-quarter of the new immigrants who arrived during the decade chose to settle there, according to one of the sources. "But today, that doesn't exist," he said. | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
