| Author | Message | | Top | | Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 8:59 am Post subject: Re: JINSA/PNAC Neocons Ready to Expand Iraq War to Syria/Ira |
| | Alpha wrote: | | Israel is the Problem |
OH YEAH.....
Here ya go.
BOUGHT, all for Israel.
Treasure, country, soul, nation, way of life, even our children.
Read about Kerry:
</color>http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030/
Transcript for April 18
Guest: Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, presidential candidate
NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS
Updated: 11:47 a.m. ET April 18, 2004
MR. RUSSERT: Israel assassinated Hamas leader Rantisi. Do you support that
assassination?
SEN. KERRY: I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of
terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had years to make
up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to. Arafat refuses to.
And I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure. The
moment Hamas says, "We've given up violence, we're prepared to negotiate," I am
absolutely confident they will find an Israel that is thirsty to have that negotiation.
MR. RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of
six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the
1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their
particular homes. Do you support President Bush?
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: Completely?
SEN. KERRY: Yes. | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:24 pm Post subject: ‘US neo-conservatives more dangerous than Jewish lobby’ |
| The following posts appear at www.whatreallyhappened.com for today:
‘US neo-conservatives more dangerous than Jewish lobby’
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-4-2004_pg4_1
The neocon conundrum
Posted Apr 20, 2004 07:34 AM PSTWith the situation in Iraq darkening, hawks are saying we can't leave without unleashing a catastrophe. The problem is, that'll happen if we stay, too.
If the neocons were really worried about conditions in Iraq, they would not have invaded in the first place, because they knew full well there really weren't WMDs in Iraq, and that Saddam was not a threat, and that condition sunder Saddam were better than what was going to result from an invasion and conquest.
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/conundrum.html
Bush Letter Cites 'Crusade' Against Terrorism
Posted Apr 20, 2004 08:22 AM PSTYears after President Bush set off alarm bells in the Muslim world by referring to his war against terrorism as a "crusade," the word that Arabs equate with Christian brutality has resurfaced in a Bush campaign fund-raising letter, officials acknowledged on Sunday.
"Entering the city [Jerusalem, July 15, 1099], our pilgrims pursued and killed Saracens up to the Temple of Solomon, in which they had assembled and where they gave battle to us furiously for the whole day so that their blood flowed throughout the whole temple. Finally, having overcome the pagans, our knights seized a great number of men and women, and the killed whom they wished and whom they wished they let live.... Then, rejoicing and weeping from extreme joy, our men went to worship at the sepulchre of jour Saviour Jesus and thus fulfilled their pledge to Him.... They also ordered that all the Saracen dead should be thrown out of the city because of the extreme stench, for the city was almost full of their cadavers. The live Saracens dragged the dead out before the gates and made piles of them, like houses. No one has ever heard of or seen such a slaughter of pagan peoples since pyres were made of them like boundary marks, and no one except God knows their number."
[Histoire anonyme de la premiere croisade, L. Brehier, ed. Paris: Champion, 1924 (From The Portable Medieval Reader, Ed. James Bruce Ross and Mary Martin McLaughlin)]
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=4858038
http://www.nowarforisrael.com
http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:29 pm Post subject: Re: JINSA/PNAC Neocons Ready to Expand Iraq War to Syria/Ira |
| | Top wrote: | | Alpha wrote: | | Israel is the Problem |
OH YEAH.....
Here ya go.
BOUGHT, all for Israel.
Treasure, country, soul, nation, way of life, even our children.
Read about Kerry:
</color>http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030/
Transcript for April 18
Guest: Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, presidential candidate
NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS
Updated: 11:47 a.m. ET April 18, 2004
MR. RUSSERT: Israel assassinated Hamas leader Rantisi. Do you support that
assassination?
SEN. KERRY: I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of
terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had years to make
up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to. Arafat refuses to.
And I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure. The
moment Hamas says, "We've given up violence, we're prepared to negotiate," I am
absolutely confident they will find an Israel that is thirsty to have that negotiation.
MR. RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of
six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the
1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their
particular homes. Do you support President Bush?
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: Completely?
SEN. KERRY: Yes. |
Exactly, TOP...
Subj: Russert Asks, Kerry Avoids
Date: 4/18/04 4:37:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: jblankfort@earthlink.net
Sent from the Internet (Details)
If anyone still thinks that John Kerry will be a whit better that the Resident on foreign policy, each day seems to bring with it further proof that is a foolish illusion. This man, who is not "a useful idiot" like Bush and is able to string at least several coherent sentences together at a time, has clearly placed himself in the pocket of the pro-Israel lobby. His refusal to give answers to what are straightforward questions by Russert is as inexcusable as Bush's performance on Tuesday night. Moreover, while Bush is trying to get the US out from under what has become a debacle in Iraq and get US troops out of there, Kerry and his supporters are calling for more troops to be sent. Meanwhile, Nader seems to be silent on both issues. (Thanks to Jim Harris for the transcript.)
Jeff
From http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030/
EXCERPT:
MR. RUSSERT: Israel assassinated Hamas leader Rantisi. Do you support that assassination?
SEN. KERRY: I believe Israel has every right in the world to respond to any act of terror against it. Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had years to make up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to. Arafat refuses to. And I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure. The moment Hamas says, "We've given up violence, we're prepared to negotiate," I am absolutely confident they will find an Israel that is thirsty to have that negotiation.
MR. RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the 1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their particular homes. Do you support President Bush?
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: Completely?
SEN. KERRY: Yes.
MR. RUSSERT: You also said in December that you would consider as presidential ambassadors to the Middle East President Clinton, but also former President Carter and Secretary of State Baker. You then met with Jewish leaders and said, "I will not send Carter or Baker." Why?
SEN. KERRY: I think that what I was trying to talk about, Tim, was a kind of potential for
bipartisanship as to how you might be able to approach putting a special envoy in place. The names obviously need to be acceptable to everybody within the community. You've got to do that as a matter of diplomacy. Subsequent to those names being floated, obviously, some people have different views about it.
MR. RUSSERT: Why do you think Carter and Baker are not acceptable?
SEN. KERRY: Well, that's not important. What's important is how to resolve the crisis, how do you move forward. I believe there's a way to move forward, I'm convinced of that. Now, I think what the president did in the last few days is to recognize a reality that even President Clinton came to. If you're going to have a Jewish state, and that is what we are committed to do and that is what Israel is, you cannot have a right of return that's open-ended or something. You just can't do it. It's always been a non-starter. I personally said that at a speech I gave to the Arab community in New York at the World Economic Forum. I've said that. I've also said that it is realistic because we know that at Taba they negotiated the annexation of certain territory. So it's really stating a reality.
What this administration has not done that it needs to do, what we need is a diplomacy that is ongoing and engaged with the Arab community in order to help to create and help emerge the kind of entity that will provide a peaceful resolution to this. Israel has no partner, no one to be able to negotiate with today. I think the United States and this administration could have done a much more effective job of helping that to emerge, but they were completely disengaged. I will not be disengaged. And I will have somebody involved in that at the highest level that has the respect of the community, the trust of Israel, and we will be able to move forward.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 20, 2004
Neo-Crazy Coup d'Etat
by Gordon Prather
Perhaps you haven't noticed – certainly the neo-crazies hope you haven't – but we have just experienced a coup d'etat.
What's a "coup d'etat"?
Well, according to Edward Luttwak, author of Coup D'etat: A Practical Handbook, "A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder."
Although neo-crazy media sycophant Melanie Kirkpatrick, associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, doesn't actually say a Luttwak-like "coup d'etat" has taken place, she effectively does.
Douglas Feith's sin is being Donald Rumsfeld's ideas man and one of the brains behind some of the most significant foreign policy and national security advances of the Bush administration. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Feith has transformed a once relatively obscure corner of the Pentagon into the world's most effective think tank. The fact that the president has adopted many of the ideas brewed there infuriates those who see Defense usurping a role that rightly belongs to the State Department.
"Without a doubt, the policy division has the most significant intellectual capabilities in the government," says former Defense Department official Richard Perle, who hired Mr. Feith for the Reagan Pentagon and now sits on the Defense Policy Board. "It's a creative shop that produces a lot of good ideas," says Stephen Hadley, deputy national security adviser and one of the policy group's main customers. "They are prepared to think differently."
Perhaps you're wondering how all this sinning began?
In 1981, at the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy was created in the Pentagon – at the behest of Sen. Scoop Jackson – for Richard Perle.
Jackson, who died in 1983, and his right-hand man, Perle, had stood out among Democrats in the Carter years, being fiercely anti-Soviet, pro-Israel, and pro-ABM.
Now, the Pentagon does not make U.S. foreign policy. Even military alliances – such as NATO – are negotiated by the U.S. State Department, entered into by the president, and approved by Congress, with very little Pentagon input.
Until neo-crazy Perle was planted in the Pentagon's Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, its principal "mission" had been explicating to the Secretary of Defense the military implications of various U.S. military alliances on our National Security. It was not supposed to concern itself with the political or foreign relations consequences.
The policy office did manage the Pentagon's Foreign Military Sales programs, conducted in support of our military alliances. For example, it managed the billions of dollars worth of arms and military equipment we provide each year to Israel.
The office newly created for Perle subsumed those responsibilities for NATO and Israel, but Perle was given significant new roles and missions, as well.
Perle was to "develop, coordinate and oversee the implementation" of "policy related to arms control negotiations, implementations, and verification," as well as "policy related to U.S. nuclear offensive and defensive forces, including the structure, requirements, and posture of strategic forces, strategic reserve forces, theater nuclear forces, and warning systems; surety, reliability, safety, and security of nuclear forces; and strategic and theater missile defense."
Wow!
Now, establishing Perle's office essentially amounted to a reorganization of the Pentagon, and that required the approval of Congress. Once the reorganization plan had been sent to Congress and approved, President Reagan had then to nominate Perle and the Senate had then to confirm or reject him.
Rarely has any action requiring so much roiling of Pentagon, State Department, White House and congressional turf been accomplished so speedily.
Incredibly, Perle was in office well before June 11, 1981, when eight U.S.-supplied Israeli F-16 aircraft – escorted by six U.S.-supplied Israeli F-15 fighter escorts – preemptively destroyed Saddam Hussein's Osiraq reactor.
Perle became Chairman of the NATO High-Level Group and was soon a strap-hanger – and allegedly more – at Reagan-Gorbachev summits.
When Perle left, he attempted to have his neo-crazy understudy, Frank Gaffney, succeed him, but the Senate wouldn't have it. But when George Bush became President, a gaggle of neo-crazies – Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Stephen Hadley and others – took over the Pentagon policy shop.
They tried – but failed – to get Bush the Elder to inflict "regime change" on the Islamic world. Now, they've succeeded with Bush the Younger. In succeeding, they've liberally cribbed from Luttwak's book, appearing to have embraced this maxim:
"Our first objective will be achieved by conveying the reality and strength of the coup instead of trying to justify it. ..."
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/prather.php?articleid=2343
WOODWARD BLOWS LID OFF NEOCON CONSPIRACY FOR IRAQ WAR:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/19/woodward-blows-lid-off-neocon-conspiracy-for-iraq-war.php
Fisk: Bush Legitimizes Terrorism:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/fisk-bush-legitimizes-terrorism.php
Hamas' Rantissi Assassinated:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/hamas-rantisi-assassinated.php
Inside the neo-con Pentagon:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/18/inside-the-neocon-pentagon.php
ALL FOR ISRAEL:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/hamas-rantisi-assassinated.php
Israel's Standing as U.S. Ally Questioned (Excellent Interview with former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern can be listened to via the link at this URL):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/israel-s-standing-as-u-s-ally-questioned.php | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:37 pm Post subject: Neo-Crazy Coup d'Etat |
| April 20, 2004
Neo-Crazy Coup d'Etat
by Gordon Prather
Perhaps you haven't noticed – certainly the neo-crazies hope you haven't – but we have just experienced a coup d'etat.
What's a "coup d'etat"?
Well, according to Edward Luttwak, author of Coup D'etat: A Practical Handbook, "A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder."
Although neo-crazy media sycophant Melanie Kirkpatrick, associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, doesn't actually say a Luttwak-like "coup d'etat" has taken place, she effectively does.
Douglas Feith's sin is being Donald Rumsfeld's ideas man and one of the brains behind some of the most significant foreign policy and national security advances of the Bush administration. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Feith has transformed a once relatively obscure corner of the Pentagon into the world's most effective think tank. The fact that the president has adopted many of the ideas brewed there infuriates those who see Defense usurping a role that rightly belongs to the State Department.
"Without a doubt, the policy division has the most significant intellectual capabilities in the government," says former Defense Department official Richard Perle, who hired Mr. Feith for the Reagan Pentagon and now sits on the Defense Policy Board. "It's a creative shop that produces a lot of good ideas," says Stephen Hadley, deputy national security adviser and one of the policy group's main customers. "They are prepared to think differently."
Perhaps you're wondering how all this sinning began?
In 1981, at the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy was created in the Pentagon – at the behest of Sen. Scoop Jackson – for Richard Perle.
Jackson, who died in 1983, and his right-hand man, Perle, had stood out among Democrats in the Carter years, being fiercely anti-Soviet, pro-Israel, and pro-ABM.
Now, the Pentagon does not make U.S. foreign policy. Even military alliances – such as NATO – are negotiated by the U.S. State Department, entered into by the president, and approved by Congress, with very little Pentagon input.
Until neo-crazy Perle was planted in the Pentagon's Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, its principal "mission" had been explicating to the Secretary of Defense the military implications of various U.S. military alliances on our National Security. It was not supposed to concern itself with the political or foreign relations consequences.
The policy office did manage the Pentagon's Foreign Military Sales programs, conducted in support of our military alliances. For example, it managed the billions of dollars worth of arms and military equipment we provide each year to Israel.
The office newly created for Perle subsumed those responsibilities for NATO and Israel, but Perle was given significant new roles and missions, as well.
Perle was to "develop, coordinate and oversee the implementation" of "policy related to arms control negotiations, implementations, and verification," as well as "policy related to U.S. nuclear offensive and defensive forces, including the structure, requirements, and posture of strategic forces, strategic reserve forces, theater nuclear forces, and warning systems; surety, reliability, safety, and security of nuclear forces; and strategic and theater missile defense."
Wow!
Now, establishing Perle's office essentially amounted to a reorganization of the Pentagon, and that required the approval of Congress. Once the reorganization plan had been sent to Congress and approved, President Reagan had then to nominate Perle and the Senate had then to confirm or reject him.
Rarely has any action requiring so much roiling of Pentagon, State Department, White House and congressional turf been accomplished so speedily.
Incredibly, Perle was in office well before June 11, 1981, when eight U.S.-supplied Israeli F-16 aircraft – escorted by six U.S.-supplied Israeli F-15 fighter escorts – preemptively destroyed Saddam Hussein's Osiraq reactor.
Perle became Chairman of the NATO High-Level Group and was soon a strap-hanger – and allegedly more – at Reagan-Gorbachev summits.
When Perle left, he attempted to have his neo-crazy understudy, Frank Gaffney, succeed him, but the Senate wouldn't have it. But when George Bush became President, a gaggle of neo-crazies – Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Stephen Hadley and others – took over the Pentagon policy shop.
They tried – but failed – to get Bush the Elder to inflict "regime change" on the Islamic world. Now, they've succeeded with Bush the Younger. In succeeding, they've liberally cribbed from Luttwak's book, appearing to have embraced this maxim:
"Our first objective will be achieved by conveying the reality and strength of the coup instead of trying to justify it. ..."
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/prather.php?articleid=2343
See how many of the names mentioned above are also mentioned in the first two URLs included below:
Also see how this JINSA/PNAC Zionist hack Dick Cheney pushed Bush to get us into Iraq for Israel (and Halliburton/Bechtel as Cheney used to be the CEO of Halliburton as well):
http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk0910.html
Here is the 'Men from JINSA and CSP' article from 'The Nation' which Fisk mentions in the above article about Cheney's association with JINSA/PNAC (now you know why Cheney pushed so hard for the Iraq invasion as Woodward mentions in his new book which was discussed on '60 Minutes' earlier tonight):
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest
Also, be sure to read the 'War Conceived in Israel' article which is linked under the map of 'greater Israel' after scrolling down to it on the left side at www.nowarforisrael.com
ALL FOR ISRAEL:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/all-for-israel.php
MORE ON THE JINSA/PNAC NEOCONS AND THEIR CONSPIRACY AT THE WHITEHOUSE TO GO TO WAR (FOR ISRAEL) AS CONVEYED BY BOB WOODWARD ON '60 MINUTES' EARLIER TONIGHT (AS WOODWARD WILL BE ON WITH 'LARRY KING' TOMORROW ON CNN):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/03/10/jinsa-pnac-zionist-neocon-spy-unit-skirted-cia-on-iraq.php
Scroll down to where it mentions www.warwithoutend.co.uk and Richard Perle at this URL for the full story of how we invaded Iraq for Israel:
http://expatsagainstbush.typepad.com/home/2003/10/political_leani.html
NO US SOLDIER SHOULD HAVE TO DIE IN IRAQ FOR ISRAEL TO GET OIL:
http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html
INSIDE THE JINSA/PNAC NEOCON PENTAGON:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/18/inside-the-neocon-pentagon.php
READ (VIA THE FOLLOWING URL) HOW AMERICAN JEW JACK BERNSTEIN WARNED US (IN HIS 'LIFE OF AN AMERICAN JEW IN RACIST/MARXIST ISRAEL') THAT ZIONISTS IN ISRAEL AND IN THE USA WOULD TRICK US INTO FIGHTING MIDDLE WARS FOR ISRAEL (LIKE THE CURRENT SITUATION IN IRAQ) AS YOU CAN SEE THE COFFINS RETURNING HOME FROM IRAQ IN THE PICTURE AT THE TOP OF WWW.WHATREALLYHAPPENED.COM as the JINSA/PNAC Necon cabal in the current Bush regime doesn't want US to see that picture as they are quite content to continue to have US soldiers dying in Iraq for Israel:
http://www.rense.com/general31/lifeof.htm
Bin Laden warned us in 1998 that we would be attacked if our government continued to support Israel's brutal oppression of the Palestinian people (but the 'protect Israel first' US press/media did not report this to Americans to the extent that it should have):
http://www.investigate911.com/binladensez.htm | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:06 am Post subject: Re: Neo-Crazy Coup d'Etat |
| Read more about this JINSA/PNAC (Zionist extremist Israel firster) traitor Richard Perle at the following URL as he had no business coming back to be involved with the US government in the current Bush regime (he recently resigned but is still very much involved):
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/12/Counterpunch_1.html
| Alpha wrote: | April 20, 2004
Neo-Crazy Coup d'Etat
by Gordon Prather
Perhaps you haven't noticed – certainly the neo-crazies hope you haven't – but we have just experienced a coup d'etat.
What's a "coup d'etat"?
Well, according to Edward Luttwak, author of Coup D'etat: A Practical Handbook, "A coup consists of the infiltration of a small but critical segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder."
Although neo-crazy media sycophant Melanie Kirkpatrick, associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, doesn't actually say a Luttwak-like "coup d'etat" has taken place, she effectively does.
Douglas Feith's sin is being Donald Rumsfeld's ideas man and one of the brains behind some of the most significant foreign policy and national security advances of the Bush administration. As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Feith has transformed a once relatively obscure corner of the Pentagon into the world's most effective think tank. The fact that the president has adopted many of the ideas brewed there infuriates those who see Defense usurping a role that rightly belongs to the State Department.
"Without a doubt, the policy division has the most significant intellectual capabilities in the government," says former Defense Department official Richard Perle, who hired Mr. Feith for the Reagan Pentagon and now sits on the Defense Policy Board. "It's a creative shop that produces a lot of good ideas," says Stephen Hadley, deputy national security adviser and one of the policy group's main customers. "They are prepared to think differently."
Perhaps you're wondering how all this sinning began?
In 1981, at the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, the Office of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy was created in the Pentagon – at the behest of Sen. Scoop Jackson – for Richard Perle.
Jackson, who died in 1983, and his right-hand man, Perle, had stood out among Democrats in the Carter years, being fiercely anti-Soviet, pro-Israel, and pro-ABM.
Now, the Pentagon does not make U.S. foreign policy. Even military alliances – such as NATO – are negotiated by the U.S. State Department, entered into by the president, and approved by Congress, with very little Pentagon input.
Until neo-crazy Perle was planted in the Pentagon's Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, its principal "mission" had been explicating to the Secretary of Defense the military implications of various U.S. military alliances on our National Security. It was not supposed to concern itself with the political or foreign relations consequences.
The policy office did manage the Pentagon's Foreign Military Sales programs, conducted in support of our military alliances. For example, it managed the billions of dollars worth of arms and military equipment we provide each year to Israel.
The office newly created for Perle subsumed those responsibilities for NATO and Israel, but Perle was given significant new roles and missions, as well.
Perle was to "develop, coordinate and oversee the implementation" of "policy related to arms control negotiations, implementations, and verification," as well as "policy related to U.S. nuclear offensive and defensive forces, including the structure, requirements, and posture of strategic forces, strategic reserve forces, theater nuclear forces, and warning systems; surety, reliability, safety, and security of nuclear forces; and strategic and theater missile defense."
Wow!
Now, establishing Perle's office essentially amounted to a reorganization of the Pentagon, and that required the approval of Congress. Once the reorganization plan had been sent to Congress and approved, President Reagan had then to nominate Perle and the Senate had then to confirm or reject him.
Rarely has any action requiring so much roiling of Pentagon, State Department, White House and congressional turf been accomplished so speedily.
Incredibly, Perle was in office well before June 11, 1981, when eight U.S.-supplied Israeli F-16 aircraft – escorted by six U.S.-supplied Israeli F-15 fighter escorts – preemptively destroyed Saddam Hussein's Osiraq reactor.
Perle became Chairman of the NATO High-Level Group and was soon a strap-hanger – and allegedly more – at Reagan-Gorbachev summits.
When Perle left, he attempted to have his neo-crazy understudy, Frank Gaffney, succeed him, but the Senate wouldn't have it. But when George Bush became President, a gaggle of neo-crazies – Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Stephen Hadley and others – took over the Pentagon policy shop.
They tried – but failed – to get Bush the Elder to inflict "regime change" on the Islamic world. Now, they've succeeded with Bush the Younger. In succeeding, they've liberally cribbed from Luttwak's book, appearing to have embraced this maxim:
"Our first objective will be achieved by conveying the reality and strength of the coup instead of trying to justify it. ..."
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/prather.php?articleid=2343
See how many of the names mentioned above are also mentioned in the first two URLs included below:
Also see how this JINSA/PNAC Zionist hack Dick Cheney pushed Bush to get us into Iraq for Israel (and Halliburton/Bechtel as Cheney used to be the CEO of Halliburton as well):
http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk0910.html
Here is the 'Men from JINSA and CSP' article from 'The Nation' which Fisk mentions in the above article about Cheney's association with JINSA/PNAC (now you know why Cheney pushed so hard for the Iraq invasion as Woodward mentions in his new book which was discussed on '60 Minutes' earlier tonight):
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest
Also, be sure to read the 'War Conceived in Israel' article which is linked under the map of 'greater Israel' after scrolling down to it on the left side at www.nowarforisrael.com
ALL FOR ISRAEL:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/17/all-for-israel.php
MORE ON THE JINSA/PNAC NEOCONS AND THEIR CONSPIRACY AT THE WHITEHOUSE TO GO TO WAR (FOR ISRAEL) AS CONVEYED BY BOB WOODWARD ON '60 MINUTES' EARLIER TONIGHT (AS WOODWARD WILL BE ON WITH 'LARRY KING' TOMORROW ON CNN):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/03/10/jinsa-pnac-zionist-neocon-spy-unit-skirted-cia-on-iraq.php
Scroll down to where it mentions www.warwithoutend.co.uk and Richard Perle at this URL for the full story of how we invaded Iraq for Israel:
http://expatsagainstbush.typepad.com/home/2003/10/political_leani.html
NO US SOLDIER SHOULD HAVE TO DIE IN IRAQ FOR ISRAEL TO GET OIL:
http://www.nogw.com/warforisrael.html
INSIDE THE JINSA/PNAC NEOCON PENTAGON:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2004/04/18/inside-the-neocon-pentagon.php
READ (VIA THE FOLLOWING URL) HOW AMERICAN JEW JACK BERNSTEIN WARNED US (IN HIS 'LIFE OF AN AMERICAN JEW IN RACIST/MARXIST ISRAEL') THAT ZIONISTS IN ISRAEL AND IN THE USA WOULD TRICK US INTO FIGHTING MIDDLE WARS FOR ISRAEL (LIKE THE CURRENT SITUATION IN IRAQ) AS YOU CAN SEE THE COFFINS RETURNING HOME FROM IRAQ IN THE PICTURE AT THE TOP OF WWW.WHATREALLYHAPPENED.COM as the JINSA/PNAC Necon cabal in the current Bush regime doesn't want US to see that picture as they are quite content to continue to have US soldiers dying in Iraq for Israel:
http://www.rense.com/general31/lifeof.htm
Bin Laden warned us in 1998 that we would be attacked if our government continued to support Israel's brutal oppression of the Palestinian people (but the 'protect Israel first' US press/media did not report this to Americans to the extent that it should have):
http://www.investigate911.com/binladensez.htm | | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:09 am Post subject: Israel/Likudite Neocon Agenda Supported by These Whackos Too |
| Comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power
US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy
George Monbiot
Tuesday April 20, 2004
The Guardian
To understand what is happening in the Middle East, you must first understand what is happening in Texas. To understand what is happening there, you should read the resolutions passed at the state's Republican party conventions last month. Take a look, for example, at the decisions made in Harris County, which covers much of Houston.
The delegates began by nodding through a few uncontroversial matters: homosexuality is contrary to the truths ordained by God; "any mechanism to process, license, record, register or monitor the ownership of guns" should be repealed; income tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and corporation tax should be abolished; and immigrants should be deterred by electric fences. Thus fortified, they turned to the real issue: the affairs of a small state 7,000 miles away. It was then, according to a participant, that the "screaming and near fist fights" began.
I don't know what the original motion said, but apparently it was "watered down significantly" as a result of the shouting match. The motion they adopted stated that Israel has an undivided claim to Jerusalem and the West Bank, that Arab states should be "pressured" to absorb refugees from Palestine, and that Israel should do whatever it wishes in seeking to eliminate terrorism. Good to see that the extremists didn't prevail then.
But why should all this be of such pressing interest to the people of a state which is seldom celebrated for its fascination with foreign affairs? The explanation is slowly becoming familiar to us, but we still have some difficulty in taking it seriously.
In the United States, several million people have succumbed to an extraordinary delusion. In the 19th century, two immigrant preachers cobbled together a series of unrelated passages from the Bible to create what appears to be a consistent narrative: Jesus will return to Earth when certain preconditions have been met. The first of these was the establishment of a state of Israel. The next involves Israel's occupation of the rest of its "biblical lands" (most of the Middle East), and the rebuilding of the Third Temple on the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques. The legions of the antichrist will then be deployed against Israel, and their war will lead to a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. The Jews will either burn or convert to Christianity, and the Messiah will return to Earth.
What makes the story so appealing to Christian fundamentalists is that before the big battle begins, all "true believers" (ie those who believe what they believe) will be lifted out of their clothes and wafted up to heaven during an event called the Rapture. Not only do the worthy get to sit at the right hand of God, but they will be able to watch, from the best seats, their political and religious opponents being devoured by boils, sores, locusts and frogs, during the seven years of Tribulation which follow.
The true believers are now seeking to bring all this about. This means staging confrontations at the old temple site (in 2000, three US Christians were deported for trying to blow up the mosques there), sponsoring Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, demanding ever more US support for Israel, and seeking to provoke a final battle with the Muslim world/Axis of Evil/United Nations/ European Union/France or whoever the legions of the antichrist turn out to be.
The believers are convinced that they will soon be rewarded for their efforts. The antichrist is apparently walking among us, in the guise of Kofi Annan, Javier Solana, Yasser Arafat or, more plausibly, Silvio Berlusconi. The Wal-Mart corporation is also a candidate (in my view a very good one), because it wants to radio-tag its stock, thereby exposing humankind to the Mark of the Beast.
By clicking on www.rapture ready.com, you can discover how close you might be to flying out of your pyjamas. The infidels among us should take note that the Rapture Index currently stands at 144, just one point below the critical threshold, beyond which the sky will be filled with floating nudists. Beast Government, Wild Weather and Israel are all trading at the maximum five points (the EU is debat ing its constitution, there was a freak hurricane in the south Atlantic, Hamas has sworn to avenge the killing of its leaders), but the second coming is currently being delayed by an unfortunate decline in drug abuse among teenagers and a weak showing by the antichrist (both of which score only two).
We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. That their beliefs are bonkers does not mean they are marginal. American pollsters believe that 15-18% of US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure included 33% of Republicans. The best-selling contemporary books in the US are the 12 volumes of the Left Behind series, which provide what is usually described as a "fictionalised" account of the Rapture (this, apparently, distinguishes it from the other one), with plenty of dripping details about what will happen to the rest of us. The people who believe all this don't believe it just a little; for them it is a matter of life eternal and death.
And among them are some of the most powerful men in America. John Ashcroft, the attorney general, is a true believer, so are several prominent senators and the House majority leader, Tom DeLay. Mr DeLay (who is also the co-author of the marvellously named DeLay-Doolittle Amendment, postponing campaign finance reforms) travelled to Israel last year to tell the Knesset that "there is no middle ground, no moderate position worth taking".
So here we have a major political constituency - representing much of the current president's core vote - in the most powerful nation on Earth, which is actively seeking to provoke a new world war. Its members see the invasion of Iraq as a warm-up act, as Revelation (9:14-15) maintains that four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates" will be released "to slay the third part of men". They batter down the doors of the White House as soon as its support for Israel wavers: when Bush asked Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received 100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never mentioned the matter again.
The electoral calculation, crazy as it appears, works like this. Governments stand or fall on domestic issues. For 85% of the US electorate, the Middle East is a foreign issue, and therefore of secondary interest when they enter the polling booth. For 15% of the electorate, the Middle East is not just a domestic matter, it's a personal one: if the president fails to start a conflagration there, his core voters don't get to sit at the right hand of God. Bush, in other words, stands to lose fewer votes by encouraging Israeli aggression than he stands to lose by restraining it. He would be mad to listen to these people. He would also be mad not to.
· George Monbiot's book The Age of Consent: a Manifesto for a New World Order is now published in paperback
www.monbiot.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 | | | | Top | | Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:02 am Post subject: Re: Israel/Likudite Neocon Agenda Supported by These Whackos |
| | Alpha wrote: | Comment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power
US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy
George Monbiot
Tuesday April 20, 2004
The Guardian
To understand what is happening in the Middle East, you must first understand what is happening in Texas. To understand what is happening there, you should read the resolutions passed at the state's Republican party conventions last month. Take a look, for example, at the decisions made in Harris County, which covers much of Houston.
The delegates began by nodding through a few uncontroversial matters: homosexuality is contrary to the truths ordained by God; "any mechanism to process, license, record, register or monitor the ownership of guns" should be repealed; income tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and corporation tax should be abolished; and immigrants should be deterred by electric fences. Thus fortified, they turned to the real issue: the affairs of a small state 7,000 miles away. It was then, according to a participant, that the "screaming and near fist fights" began.
I don't know what the original motion said, but apparently it was "watered down significantly" as a result of the shouting match. The motion they adopted stated that Israel has an undivided claim to Jerusalem and the West Bank, that Arab states should be "pressured" to absorb refugees from Palestine, and that Israel should do whatever it wishes in seeking to eliminate terrorism. Good to see that the extremists didn't prevail then.
But why should all this be of such pressing interest to the people of a state which is seldom celebrated for its fascination with foreign affairs? The explanation is slowly becoming familiar to us, but we still have some difficulty in taking it seriously.
In the United States, several million people have succumbed to an extraordinary delusion. In the 19th century, two immigrant preachers cobbled together a series of unrelated passages from the Bible to create what appears to be a consistent narrative: Jesus will return to Earth when certain preconditions have been met. The first of these was the establishment of a state of Israel. The next involves Israel's occupation of the rest of its "biblical lands" (most of the Middle East), and the rebuilding of the Third Temple on the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques. The legions of the antichrist will then be deployed against Israel, and their war will lead to a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. The Jews will either burn or convert to Christianity, and the Messiah will return to Earth.
What makes the story so appealing to Christian fundamentalists is that before the big battle begins, all "true believers" (ie those who believe what they believe) will be lifted out of their clothes and wafted up to heaven during an event called the Rapture. Not only do the worthy get to sit at the right hand of God, but they will be able to watch, from the best seats, their political and religious opponents being devoured by boils, sores, locusts and frogs, during the seven years of Tribulation which follow.
The true believers are now seeking to bring all this about. This means staging confrontations at the old temple site (in 2000, three US Christians were deported for trying to blow up the mosques there), sponsoring Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, demanding ever more US support for Israel, and seeking to provoke a final battle with the Muslim world/Axis of Evil/United Nations/ European Union/France or whoever the legions of the antichrist turn out to be.
The believers are convinced that they will soon be rewarded for their efforts. The antichrist is apparently walking among us, in the guise of Kofi Annan, Javier Solana, Yasser Arafat or, more plausibly, Silvio Berlusconi. The Wal-Mart corporation is also a candidate (in my view a very good one), because it wants to radio-tag its stock, thereby exposing humankind to the Mark of the Beast.
By clicking on www.rapture ready.com, you can discover how close you might be to flying out of your pyjamas. The infidels among us should take note that the Rapture Index currently stands at 144, just one point below the critical threshold, beyond which the sky will be filled with floating nudists. Beast Government, Wild Weather and Israel are all trading at the maximum five points (the EU is debat ing its constitution, there was a freak hurricane in the south Atlantic, Hamas has sworn to avenge the killing of its leaders), but the second coming is currently being delayed by an unfortunate decline in drug abuse among teenagers and a weak showing by the antichrist (both of which score only two).
We can laugh at these people, but we should not dismiss them. That their beliefs are bonkers does not mean they are marginal. American pollsters believe that 15-18% of US voters belong to churches or movements which subscribe to these teachings. A survey in 1999 suggested that this figure included 33% of Republicans. The best-selling contemporary books in the US are the 12 volumes of the Left Behind series, which provide what is usually described as a "fictionalised" account of the Rapture (this, apparently, distinguishes it from the other one), with plenty of dripping details about what will happen to the rest of us. The people who believe all this don't believe it just a little; for them it is a matter of life eternal and death.
And among them are some of the most powerful men in America. John Ashcroft, the attorney general, is a true believer, so are several prominent senators and the House majority leader, Tom DeLay. Mr DeLay (who is also the co-author of the marvellously named DeLay-Doolittle Amendment, postponing campaign finance reforms) travelled to Israel last year to tell the Knesset that "there is no middle ground, no moderate position worth taking".
So here we have a major political constituency - representing much of the current president's core vote - in the most powerful nation on Earth, which is actively seeking to provoke a new world war. Its members see the invasion of Iraq as a warm-up act, as Revelation (9:14-15) maintains that four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates" will be released "to slay the third part of men". They batter down the doors of the White House as soon as its support for Israel wavers: when Bush asked Ariel Sharon to pull his tanks out of Jenin in 2002, he received 100,000 angry emails from Christian fundamentalists, and never mentioned the matter again.
The electoral calculation, crazy as it appears, works like this. Governments stand or fall on domestic issues. For 85% of the US electorate, the Middle East is a foreign issue, and therefore of secondary interest when they enter the polling booth. For 15% of the electorate, the Middle East is not just a domestic matter, it's a personal one: if the president fails to start a conflagration there, his core voters don't get to sit at the right hand of God. Bush, in other words, stands to lose fewer votes by encouraging Israeli aggression than he stands to lose by restraining it. He would be mad to listen to these people. He would also be mad not to.
· George Monbiot's book The Age of Consent: a Manifesto for a New World Order is now published in paperback
www.monbiot.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 |
I've been saying this for a while....the Christians fundamentalists are pushing for US support of Israel, knowing it will cause trouble so Israel create enemies to kill them off and cause Armageddon, which will be the fullfilment of their beliefs.
You could say these people are in a HURRY!! 
But the amazing thing is....we Americans elect people liek that. Jim Jones types.
You know what happened in Guyana....the rapture was the cool-aid...
WEIRD | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 8:43 am Post subject: Kerry owned by those "passionately attached" to Is |
| Subj: Kerry owned by those "passionately attached" to Israel too!
Date: 4/20/04 9:46:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: nord@famvid.com
To: bilcar80@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
How pathetic! A foreign country owns both major American presidential candidates!
It looks like the USS Liberty survivors can forget abut justice under a Kerry administration.
It looks like he - like Bush - will give the Arab/Muslim world fanatics ample insentive to gain more recruits to continue their religious war against the USA.
RN
Kerry appeals for Jewish votes in Florida
By The Associated Press
HAARETZ Tue., April 20, 2004
"I have a 100 percent record ... of supporting the special relationship and friendship that we have with Israel," Kerry said. "I can guarantee you that as president, I understand not just how we do that but also how we end this sweetheart relationship with a bunch of Arab countries that still allows money to move to Hamas, Hezbollah and the Al Aqsa Brigade." | | | | Alpha | | | | foppe37 | | Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2004 10:38 am Post subject: German Liberal Jews |
| http://liberale-juden.de/de/union1.htm
What follows is what I just now wrote to the Union Liberaler Juden, Schröder himself has to mediate, (the) German Jewish organisation each year get three million Euro, and German top Jew Spiegel apparently does not like intruders.
<<I read about German prime minister Schröder himself having to mediate in a row among German Jews.
Hopefully I looked at your website, maybe some German Jews understand the similarities between Nazi Germany and Zionist Israel.
But I found just that West Bank and Gaza Strip 'need not be kept for biblical reasons', but 'may be kept for safety reasons'.
So also the 'liberal' German Jews support the Israeli colonial terror regime.
I also did not find one word about the 400.000 illegal settlers on the since 1967 occupied territories, nor about the 1948 Palestinian refugees who are the legal owners of 93% of the territory of Israel within its pre 1967 borders.
Since 'safety' was mentioned the IDF as institutionalised crime also was not mentioned.>>
So 'liberal' German Jews do not distinguish themselves in any way from other Jews.
Even when, except the USA (for the time being), the whole world condemns Zionist fascism 'liberal' German Jews are unable to read the signs on the walls.
Strange people, Jews, according to Gibbons Tacitus already wrote 'that Jews seem to regard themselves in permanent war with the rest of the world'.
Problem just are the Israeli WMD's, that are not a mirage, as the Iraqi are.
More and more I think that just the diaspora saved Judaism, and that Zionism was the dumbest Jewish project ever. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
