| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2004 5:47 pm Post subject: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons |
| Subj: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons
Date: 3/25/04 7:13:23 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: BGJDAVID
The State of Israel thrives not only on our money but on our very life's blood itself. The Gulf War was fought primarily to protect Israel's continued military dominance in the Middle East. Iraq was never a threat to America. But it was a potential threat to Israel. My article that I wrote months before the Gulf War was attacked by the zionists as being "anti-Semitic" but when we finally get the truth it seems that my article contained more truth than anything Israel delivered Bombing Iraq to Protect Israel (by James J. David) - Media Monitors Network. The Israelis used deception and lies in order to get our soldiers and our money to eliminate one of Israel's main enemy. Then the Jewish controlled media cynically used us by making an appeal to our patriotism and implying that anyone who didn't go along with the slaughter wasn't "supporting our troops." Americans died, Americans were wounded, Americans were crippled - all for the interests of a certain foreign nation. The leading supporter of this twisted crusade- two Jews and Israel supporters, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Both are dual citizens of Israel.
Report: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons
By PETER ENAV
.c The Associated Press
JERUSALEM (AP) - Parliamentary investigators have determined that Israel's intelligence services delivered an erroneous assessment of pre-war Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, an Israeli newspaper reported Thursday.
Prior to the American-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Israeli services reported Iraq had large amounts of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological agents.
Since ousting Saddam Hussein, the U.S.-led coalition's technical experts have failed to find any such weapons.
An investigative subcommittee was formed eight months ago to consider if Israeli intelligence agencies provided an accurate picture of Iraqi unconventional weapons capabilities on the eve of the Iraq war.
The Haaretz daily said the 80-page report - set to be released next week - had criticized all Israeli intelligence branches for providing erroneous assessments of Iraq's non-conventional weapons.
It said the report recommended that Israeli intelligence services re-examine their techniques and the way responsibility is divided among them.
A spokesman for legislator Yuval Steinitz, who chaired the parliamentary committee, would not comment on the Haaretz report.
The Israeli military and various intelligence agencies also declined to comment.
Based on intelligence warnings that a U.S.-led invasion could trigger an Iraqi missile attack on Israel, the Israeli military ordered citizens to update their gas mask kits in the run-up to the Iraq war. The step cost the country millions of dollars. No missiles were fired on Israel during the war.
In the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam's forces fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel. All had conventional warheads, causing considerable damage but few casualties.
The parliamentary report was based on the closed-door testimony of some 70 witnesses, including the prime minister, defense minister, military chief of staff, and the heads of the Mossad foreign intelligence service, the Shin Bet domestic intelligence service, and the military intelligence service. After the report's release, some sections will remain classified.
Last December, a former Israeli intelligence officer charged that Israel produced a flawed picture of Iraqi weapons capabilities and substantially contributed to mistakes made in U.S. and British prewar assessments on Iraq.
The comments of reserve Brig. Gen. Shlomo Brom represented an unusual criticism of the Israeli intelligence community, long regarded as one of the world's best. Prior to his retirement in 1998, Brom served in Israeli military intelligence for 25 years, and acted as the deputy chief of planning for the Israeli army.
Brom said he was directing his remarks at Military Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence, and the Mossad intelligence agency.
03/25/04 05:35 EST | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2004 5:52 pm Post subject: Re: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons |
| | Alpha wrote: | Subj: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons
Date: 3/25/04 7:13:23 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: BGJDAVID
The State of Israel thrives not only on our money but on our very life's blood itself. The Gulf War was fought primarily to protect Israel's continued military dominance in the Middle East. Iraq was never a threat to America. But it was a potential threat to Israel. My article that I wrote months before the Gulf War was attacked by the zionists as being "anti-Semitic" but when we finally get the truth it seems that my article contained more truth than anything Israel delivered Bombing Iraq to Protect Israel (by James J. David) - Media Monitors Network. The Israelis used deception and lies in order to get our soldiers and our money to eliminate one of Israel's main enemy. Then the Jewish controlled media cynically used us by making an appeal to our patriotism and implying that anyone who didn't go along with the slaughter wasn't "supporting our troops." Americans died, Americans were wounded, Americans were crippled - all for the interests of a certain foreign nation. The leading supporter of this twisted crusade- two Jews and Israel supporters, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. Both are dual citizens of Israel.
Report: Israel Wrong on Iraq Weapons
By PETER ENAV
.c The Associated Press
JERUSALEM (AP) - Parliamentary investigators have determined that Israel's intelligence services delivered an erroneous assessment of pre-war Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, an Israeli newspaper reported Thursday.
Prior to the American-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Israeli services reported Iraq had large amounts of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological agents.
Since ousting Saddam Hussein, the U.S.-led coalition's technical experts have failed to find any such weapons.
An investigative subcommittee was formed eight months ago to consider if Israeli intelligence agencies provided an accurate picture of Iraqi unconventional weapons capabilities on the eve of the Iraq war.
The Haaretz daily said the 80-page report - set to be released next week - had criticized all Israeli intelligence branches for providing erroneous assessments of Iraq's non-conventional weapons.
It said the report recommended that Israeli intelligence services re-examine their techniques and the way responsibility is divided among them.
A spokesman for legislator Yuval Steinitz, who chaired the parliamentary committee, would not comment on the Haaretz report.
The Israeli military and various intelligence agencies also declined to comment.
Based on intelligence warnings that a U.S.-led invasion could trigger an Iraqi missile attack on Israel, the Israeli military ordered citizens to update their gas mask kits in the run-up to the Iraq war. The step cost the country millions of dollars. No missiles were fired on Israel during the war.
In the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam's forces fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel. All had conventional warheads, causing considerable damage but few casualties.
The parliamentary report was based on the closed-door testimony of some 70 witnesses, including the prime minister, defense minister, military chief of staff, and the heads of the Mossad foreign intelligence service, the Shin Bet domestic intelligence service, and the military intelligence service. After the report's release, some sections will remain classified.
Last December, a former Israeli intelligence officer charged that Israel produced a flawed picture of Iraqi weapons capabilities and substantially contributed to mistakes made in U.S. and British prewar assessments on Iraq.
The comments of reserve Brig. Gen. Shlomo Brom represented an unusual criticism of the Israeli intelligence community, long regarded as one of the world's best. Prior to his retirement in 1998, Brom served in Israeli military intelligence for 25 years, and acted as the deputy chief of planning for the Israeli army.
Brom said he was directing his remarks at Military Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence, and the Mossad intelligence agency.
03/25/04 05:35 EST |
http://www.mediamonitors.net/jamesjdavid8.html
Bombing Iraq to Protect Israel
by James J. David
U.S. President George W. Bush last month accused Baghdad, along with Iran and North Korea, of making up an "axis of evil" bent on backing international terrorism and developing weapons of mass destruction. It seems that Senator Joseph Lieberman has convinced the President that Bagdad is a threat to the United States and launching a military attack seems to be the only alternative. Other close advisors such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and the Defense Chairman of the Advisory Board, Richard Perle, are also calling for the bombing of Iraq as the only sure method of destroying this threat.
When Joseph Lieberman says that it's necessary to attack Iraq because Iraq is a threat to the United States, does he really think that smart Americans believe this? Does he really think that Iraq would attack the United States? Senator Lieberman must take you and me for a fool. Let me tell you why this is utter nonsense. No one can launch an intercontinental ballistic missile without the United States instantly knowing its exact location. Therefore, any small country that launches a missile in our direction will know that it is committing national suicide. The warheads on just one of our submarines could cause these small countries literally to cease to exist. How long did it take the United States to defeat Iraq in the Gulf War? The last time I looked it was 38 seconds, and that was with conventional warfare, not nuclear, which the United States has more of than all nations combined times 1000.
If Iraq hit the United States with one or two missles, despite the loss of life, would strategically be nothing more than a pinprick. It would be like poking a sleeping bear. All you would do is make the bear mad. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that Iraq or Iran, or for that matter North Korea would trade national suicide for inflicting minimal damage on the United States. And building a force of ICBMs large enough to be real threat is beyond the economic capabilities of those three countries.
So why did Senator Joseph Lieberman convince President Bush to focus on Iraq as a threat? I'll tell you why. It's not the United States that Senator Lieberman is concerned about. We know that Iraq is not a threat to the United States. Iraq is a threat to Israel. Senator Lieberman and other pro-Israelis in Washington don't want anyone else in the Middle East to own Nuclear weapons except Israel. It's Israel, not the United States, that Lieberman is concerned about. And he is willing to risk American lives and American money to insure that Israel is the super power in the Middle East. Isn't it odd that while Lieberman is pushing for a bombing of Iraq, it's the Israelis who are inflicting most of the casualties in Middle East with its current bombing campaign. In just the last 2 days the Israelis have killed 29 Palestinians, and most of them are innocent civilians including children. Iraq hasn't killed anyone since the Gulf War, and that's been 11 years ago. In just the last 17 months the Israelis have killed over 900 Palestinians and have demolished more than 300 homes causing more than 1500 children to become homeless. And the Israelis have been doing this with F-16 fighter jets, M1A1 Abram tanks, 155mm howitzers, Chaparral and Sidewinder missiles, and Apache and Cobra attack helicopters all supplied by the good 'ole United States.
When President Bush talks about the threat of countries with weapons of mass destruction, he always adds ``and our allies.'' Iraq and Iran are not a threat to the United States or to Europe. They are a threat to Israel. North Korea is not a threat to the United States, but the Israelis greatly fear that North Korea will sell missiles to Iran and Iraq. So when Senator Lieberman says that Iraq is a threat to the United States, he really means that Iraq is a threat to Israel. His loyalty isn't so much with the United States; its more with Israel, and that's not right. And you know what? I'll bet most of the people, including President Bush already understands that, but are too scared to challenge him. After all, to challenge or criticize Israel is political suicide. Too many politicians have learned the hard way in that criticizing Israel is like turning the lights off to one's political career. And in the meantime, partly to justify this boondoggle, the United States is embarking on a reckless foreign policy that is more likely to produce war than peace. We should be talking to the Iraqis, the Iranians and the North Koreans rather than making reckless statements on global television that amount to a declaration of war. It can prove to be a deadly mistake to start believing your own deceptions and propaganda.
We are not the Big Daddy Boss of the world, and just because others disagree with our policies or decline to jump when we tell them to jump doesn't mean they are our enemies. And that's why the United States is and will be so vulnerable for more attacks on its own soil. They will be vulnerable and they will be targeted, unless America wakes up. It's time for all of us to know the truth and act accordingly.
James J. David is a retired Brigadier General and a graduate of the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College, and the National Security Course, National Defense University, Washington DC. He served nearly 3 years of Army active duty in and around the Middle East from 1967-1969.
Source:
by courtesy & © 2002 James J. David | | | | FREE_ZUNDEL_NOW | | Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:50 am Post subject: |
| It's good to see people are wakening up to the threat these Zionist doomsday freaks pose to the world. To me, they are one kool-aid drink away from taking us ALL down with them -- hear what a couple of' the world's top Zionologists have to say on this subject, these chaps really have the zios number --
HELLO
NO JEWS -- NO 9/11
by Dr. William Pierce
Broadcast Date: 9-22-01
http://www.natall.com/internet-radio/ts/092201.ram#55
In this broadcast Dr. Pierce talks about the attacks of September 11th. He says, "When people are driven into a corner -- as the non-Jewish people of the Middle East have been -- sometimes they will fight back. What happened last week was a direct consequence of the American people permitting the Jews to control their government and to use American strength to advance the Jews' interests at the expense of everyone else's interests." Dr. Pierce futher adds "It will, of course, be yet another tragedy for Americans if we let ourselves be lied into another war to advance the interests of the Jews at the expense of our own. The calamity that befell America on September 11 was the consequence of our having lost control of our own government. We want to avoid future terror attacks, of course. But more important than that -- more important than anything else -- is regaining control of our government and never again permitting another country or another people to use us for their own purposes."
THE HIJACKING OF AMERICA
by Kevin Alfred Strom
Broadcast Date: 8-10-02
http://www.natvan.com/internet-radio/ts/081002.ram#55
Kevin Strom gives a fascinating and very well documented speech about how a war with Iraq would not benefit America. He also points out how the Jewish advisors pushing for this war are trying to stay in the background. In they didn't, their policies favoring Israel over the United States might become obvious even to a few lemmings.
More ADV Radio broacasts here --
http://www.natall.com/cgi-bin/audio.cgi?year=2003#55 | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:20 pm Post subject: The Main Threat to Peace is Israel |
| http://www.antiwar.com/justin/
March 26, 2004
The Main Danger to Peace
It's Israel
by Justin Raimondo
Where are the weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East? Ask Mordechai Vanunu. He knows, all too well. On March 24, 1988, Vanunu was convicted of treason by an Israeli court for revealing the existence of Israel's secret nuclear arsenal at the Dimona facility, where he worked as a technician. Imprisoned since that time, held for the most part in solitary confinement, he is scheduled for release on April 21. Vanunu's family and friends say he has no more secrets to reveal, but the Israeli government is petrified, and is placing "restrictions" on him because of "security concerns." What Tel Aviv is really concerned about, however, is its image abroad.
Vanunu's story – how he was abducted by the Mossad after leaking details of Israel's illegal nuclear program to the London Sunday Times – underscores not only the utter ruthlessness with which the Israelis pursue their interests, but also highlights the peculiar deference paid them by their enablers in the West. Lured from London to Rome by the voluptuous "Cindy," a.k.a. Cheryl Hanin, Vanunu was drugged, chained, put in a box, and shipped to Israel as diplomatic cargo.
This unusual mode of transportation was utilized presumably as a subterfuge – the "diplomatic" rubric meant authorities could not inspect the box – although one wonders why they bothered. That this happened with the full complicity of the Italian government – a magistrate ruled in 1988 that there was "insufficient evidence" to prove Vanunu had been abducted – is indisputable. Equally certain is the complicity of the Brits, who tracked down Vanunu in London, and turned him over to the tender mercies of the Mossad. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was eager to help, but just didn't want the kidnapping to occur in London. That's why they brought in Ms. Hanin, who reportedly used what one news account called her "womanly skills" to reel in their catch.
The Israelis are worried about Vanunu, not because he has any new secrets to reveal, but because he reminds us of truths that have long been known – and steadfastly ignored. We never had evidence of Iraqi WMD, yet proof of Israel's nuclear arsenal has been staring us in the face for 16 years. By the time Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, and the "Office of Special Plans" were conjuring visions of a nuclear-armed Saddam igniting mushroom clouds – based on forgeries, tall tales peddled by Iraqi exiles, and a couple of aluminum tubes – Israel's nuclear program had already churned out hundreds of nuclear weapons.
The Israeli government is afraid of Vanunu, and seeks to impose restrictions on his movements and public utterances because they are not at all eager to draw attention to their nuclear stockpile. And with good reason. While the Israeli state is justly proud of its military capabilities, and touts them at every opportunity, it was only in 1998 that former Prime Minister Shimon Peres admitted his nation has nukes, claiming that they "built a nuclear option, not in order to have a Hiroshima but an Oslo."
Gee, that's funny, but didn't the Iraqis say something similar after the Israelis bombed the reactor at Osirak? Ah, but I'm committing the sin of "moral equivalence," because, you see, an Israeli nuke is a peace bomb, while an Iraqi nuke is a "weapon of mass destruction."
Got that?
The Israelis are trying to shut up Vanunu, even though his story is already well known, because, aside from being untimely, any focus on Israel's nuclear weapons arsenal is bound to raise the question of how likely it is to be used.
After all, even if Saddam Hussein had somehow acquired nuclear weapons, does anybody believe he would actually have used them, against the U.S. or anybody else? Deterrence worked with Joe Stalin, and stood us in good stead during the whole of the Cold War era: the threat of complete annihilation would surely have prevented the Iraqis from initiating a nuclear exchange.
But is Israel subject to the same constraints?
If, for some reason, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon believed Israel was in imminent danger, and decided to exercise the nuclear "option," incinerating, say, Tehran, what sort of retaliation would ensue – and from whom?
The U.S. would certainly oppose such a heinous act, but it would hardly go to war with Israel. The only Islamic nuclear power, Pakistan, would be unlikely to retaliate either. So who, or what, is deterring Israel from using its nuclear capability, or threatening to, and dominating the Middle East?
Without a deterrent, the possibility that Israel will actually use its nuclear capability in some future war takes on worrisome dimensions. Faced with what its rulers see as a life-and-death decision, with Israel's very survival supposedly at stake, it is not hard to imagine Sharon or some even nuttier future Prime Minister ordering a "preemptive" nuclear first strike.
The consequences, for Israel, would be severe, but not unendurable. It would become a pariah state, but its militant partisans maintain that this is already the case, and, in any event, Israel has to look out for its own interests. It has always stood alone. So what else is new?
Israel, as George W. Bush so often reminds us, has "a right to defend itself." The deadly logic of this sinister mantra, dutifully repeated by U.S. government officials on the occasion of every Israeli atrocity, leads directly to that mushroom cloud famously referred to by Condi Rice:
"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."
By "he," Rice meant Saddam Hussein, but Ariel Sharon is more like it. There is no uncertainty about the Israeli Prime Minister's capacity to plunge the Middle East into a nuclear maelstrom. Who, after all, has the power to stop him?
The Israeli Sparta could conceivably blackmail the entire region. If this is the intent of the U.S., which has now imposed sanctions on Syria for supposedly pursuing "weapons of mass destruction," then our policy could not be more effective. That this saddles us with a grave moral burden is a thought that seems not to have crossed anyone's mind.
Without pressure from the international community, including especially the United States, its principal ally and deep pockets, Israel will never give up its weapons of mass destruction: Instead of going after WMD where we know they are, we are enabling and encouraging the Israelis to brandish them. If and when they ultimately use their nukes, the horror will have "made in America" stamped all over it.
The news that a poll of Europeans showed 60 percent believed Israel to be the main danger to peace was greeted by the Amen Corner as proof of "anti-Semitism," but it is nothing of the sort: it is merely a coldly objective evaluation of the known facts. Israel, the most dangerous, if not exactly the biggest troublemaker on earth – sounds about right to me.
– Justin Raimondo | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
