'Toontime: Dolchstoss

[credit: Kevin Siers, Charlotte Observer]

The Israel Factor II

Israeli officials were exuberant when neoconservative and hard line Zionist Paul Wolfowitz was appointed Deputy Secretary of Defense in 2001. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had already expressed his belief in overthrowing Saddam Hussein in two open letters to former President Clinton. Wolfowitz, Vice President chief of staff I. Lewis Libby, and Princeton historian Bernard Lewis played prominent roles within the Regime to convince Bush to go to war on Iraq. Wolfowitz advocated for an attack on Iraq before Afghanistan at a Camp David meeting so strenuously that Cheney asked him to back off. Libby was also responsible for the report pushed on Secretary of State Collin Powell for his address to the UN on the issue of Iraq's WMD. Powell later regretted giving the address because the report was riddled with factual errors. The authors of The Israel Lobby say that these neocon officials were "obsessed" with removing Saddam from power. The push for war within the government was supported by sympathetic media commentators such as Charles Krauthammer and William Safire who wrote numerous articles insisting on war. The most visible Israel pressure group, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) also backed the war. AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr told the neocon newspaper, New York Sun, in January, 2003 that the use of force in Iraq counted as one of the group's successes in the past year.

At the Pentagon Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith was in charge of the Office of Special Plans and the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group. Both groups were staffed with ideological fellow travelers. David Wurmser and an associate of Richard Perle, Michael Maloof, were charged with finding links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. According to one journalist Israeli intelligence played a role in convincing Wolfowitz to bypass the CIA and rely heavily on the dubious exile, Ahmed Chalabi for information. Abram Shulsky, another neoconservative with long ties to Wolfowitz, headed the Office of Special Plans. The office was responsible for finding information that could be used to sell the Iraq war. According to the Guardian newspaper, the OSP forged a close tie with a parallel ad hoc intelligence capability within Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office for a source of alarmist reports that the official intelligence agency, Mossad, was not prepared to authorize. Michael Ledeen, neoconservative and fascist sympathizer, meet privately with fascist members of Italy's military intelligence with the knowledge of US government officials. In this commentator's opinion, Ledeen facilitated the entry of the forged and sensational Niger yellowcake documents, probably created by members of the notorious P2 Masonic cell, into the data stream collected by OSP and sent directly to the Vice President. The false report of attempted buys of enriched uranium ore by the Saddam regime had already been discredited by the CIA by the time the allegation made it into a presidential speech to Congress.

Chalabi had credence with the neoconservatives in government because he went to great lengths to establish links with individuals and groups in the Israel lobby. He was especially close to JINSA, but also had close ties with AEI, HI, WINEP and the most influential Israel support group, AIPAC. Chalabi pledged to forge good relations with Israel once he was installed in power in Iraq. Bernard Lewis, the academic and pro-war Bush advisor, was advocating that the INC leader be placed in charge of Baghdad after the invasion. Chalabi even offered to rebuild the oil pipeline between Mosul and Haifa. Benjamin Netanyahu boasted in mid June, 2003 that, "It won't be long when you see Iraqi oil flowing to Haifa." In view of subsequent events that statement certainly qualifies as another Chalabi pipe dream.

An operative delusion was the President's dream of transforming the Middle East into a region of peaceful democracies, starting with the toppling of Saddam Hussein. This vision is said to come from Israeli politician Natan Sharansky, whose writings apparently impressed the Charlatan, but was also a vision shared by many in Israel. Six years after the invasion encouraged by Israel and it's American lobbyists that dream has clearly turned into a nightmare for both America and Iraq.

The Israel Factor I

Of all the reasons offered for going to war against Saddam in the aftermath of the fiasco, the considerable influence of Israel and Israel's supporters in the United States is underestimated. That Israel political leaders welcomed an attack against a Arab leader they viewed as unstable and dangerous is undeniable. Their view of the security threat posed by Saddam Hussein was demonstrated when the Israeli Air Force bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor prior to it becoming operational in 1981. They mounted a public relations campaign in the spring of 2002 that was second only to the Regime's Herculean efforts to push American into an attack. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres made numerous public statements in the United States to officials and the media depicting Saddam as a dangerous dictator who posed not only an imminent threat to Israel, but also to the United States. The Israeli chorus was joined by former Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel's efforts to provoke an attack went beyond mere press statements. The Senate Intelligence Committee released a report after the revelation of no WMD in Iraq, stating that much of Israeli intelligence about Saddam given to the Regime was false. In the game of nations, getting another to do the heavy lifting for you is not a new tactic.

The authors of The Israel Lobby make a firm distinction between Israel's efforts to start a war against Iraq and those of the neoconservatives operating within the Regime. They properly place the blame for the successful propaganda campaign advocating a 'preemptive' invasion of Iraq at the feet of the neocons in government and media. However, prominent neoconservatives in the US also have extensive interconnections with pro-Israel policy groups. The authors refuse to call the policy network a "right wing cabal"[1] but a listing of the network may cause the reader to conclude the cabal term is appropriate [2]. Elliot Abrams (CSP, HI, PNAC); William Bennett (AEI, CSP, PNAC); John Bolton (AEI, JINSA, PNAC); Douglas Feith (CSP, JINSA, ZOA); Charles Krauthammer (FDD, Weekly Standard editor); William Kristol (PNAC cofounder, Weekly Standard editor); Michael Ledeen (AEI, JINSA); Richard Perle (AEI, CSP, HI, JINSA, PNAC, MEF); Daniel Pipes (PNAC, MEF, WINEP); Norman Podhoretz (HI, PNAC, Commentary); Michael Rubin (AEI, CSP, MEF); Paul Wolfowitz (AEI, PNAC, WINEP); David Wurmser (AEI, MEF, FDD); James Woolsey, and others since the list is not exhaustive.

Neocon agitation for an attack on Iraq can be traced to the early nineties when Douglas Feith wrote foreign policy articles supporting Occupied Territory settlements and their annexation. In June of 1996 he co-authored with David Wurmser and Richard Perle the "Clean Break" report for incoming Prime Minister, Bejamin Netanyahu under the auspices of an Israeli right-wing think tank. Among other positions, the report advocated removing Saddam Hussein from power to insure Israel's future national security. Netanyahu did not implement their advice, but the three neocons were soon urging the same action upon the American government.

In January 1998 neoconservatives wrote an open letter to President Clinton under the auspices of PNAC that caused a sensation among Washington policy wonks. It was signed by Bolton, Pearl, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz among others. A second letter followed in February. This one was also signed by Ann Lewis, former political director of the Democratic National Committee, and former Congressman Stephen J. Solarz (D-NY) and the usual suspects. Neocons lobbied extensively for the passage of the Iraq Liberation Act which mandated US support for efforts to remove Saddam Hussein from power. The Act authorized $97 million to fund groups committed to overthrowing Saddam, such as Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress. Perle, Wolfowitz, Woolsey and JINSA all lobbied hard for the bill's passage. It passed by unanimous consent in the Senate and by a lopsided margin in the House. President Clinton signed the bill into law in October, 1998, but did little to implement it during his final scandal plagued years in office. However, his wife Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) was consistent with his policy of regime change when she finally voted for the invasion on October 11, 2002. [continued]

[1] cabal: to unite in a small party to promote private views by intrique. Websters Dictionary Unabridged
[2] AEI-American Enterprise Institute; CSP-Center for Security Policy; HI-Hudson Institute; FDD-Foundation for Defense of Democracies; JINSA-Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs; MEF-Middle East Forum; PNAC-Project for a New American Century; WINEP-Washington Institute for Near East Policy; ZOA-Zionist Organization of America.

The Zion Exception

The United States went to war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq on the pretext that Saddam was attempting to produce nuclear weapons. However, when Middle East security problems are discussed in United States policy circles, little mention is ever made of Israel's secret nuclear arsenal. Experts estimate that Israel has an arsenal of 200 or more nuclear warheads. The US has insisted that dozen of states sign the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, but Israel has not. The Kennedy Administration wanted to restrain Israel's nuclear ambitions in the early 60's and attempted to monitor Israel's development efforts with tours of nuclear facilities, but Israel did not cooperate and actively obstructed these efforts in a way reminiscent of Iran's current foot dragging. The Kennedy administration was reluctant to confront Israel on the issue. When CIA Director Richard Helms informed President Johnson that Israel had developed nuclear capability in 1968, his response was to ask Helms to bury the intelligence in his agency. Johnson clearly had no intention of trying to stop Israel from getting the bomb. Israel also has an active chemical and biological weapons program, and has yet to ratify the Chemical or Biological Weapons Convention. Similarly, the US has turned a blind eye to this capability. But inconsistent policy positions has not deterred the current administration from threatening to attack Iran for attempting to develop a nuclear capability, despite the obvious incentive for Iran to balance power in the region.

Israel has received $154 billion (2005) in direct economic and military assistance from the US since its founding in 1948, far more than any other state. Much of that was in the form of grants. Israel is the only nation that does not have to account to the US for how the economic aid is spent. Currently Israel is receiving $3billion a year in aid, about 75% of which is military assistance. The US has subsidized Israel's successful economic development and military preeminence in the region. In return for this generous and largely unconditional subsidy Israeli leaders have felt free to ignore American foreign policy positions. Israel has continued building West Bank settlements, used US supplied cluster bombs on Lebanon contrary to agreement and annexed Syria's Golan Heights. The fact of this overwhelming American bias towards Israel that infuriates some Arab leaders, and makes facilitating peace negotiations between Israel and its Muslim neighbors so difficult.

[source: The Israel Lobby & US Foreign Policy ]

Le Shorter: Give Us A Break, Mitt

Corporate scion Mitt Romney in his home state of Michigan yesterday made another hackneyed and maudlin appeal to misguided patriotism. The only 'accomplishment' of the current Republican Regime is to embroil us in a foreign policy fiasco of historic proportions. Yet Republican candidates insist on buttressing the outgoing decider in chief by repeating the theme that only they can be trusted with the nation's security. The Iraq War has seriously undermined our security, reduced our influence in the world, curtailed our civil rights, established an offshore gulag, allowed the commission of war crimes and killed tens of thousands of innocents. With a record like that, who needs them?

In a related development, the Navy admitted that it could not be sure that threats made by radio came from Iranian speed boats that came close to US destroyers in the Strait of Hormuz. A spokesman said,
“We’re saying that we cannot make a direct connection to the boats
there. It could have come from the shore, from another ship passing by.However, it happened in the middle of all the very unusual activity, so as we assess the information and situation, we still put it in the total aggregate of what happened Sunday morning. I guess we’re not saying that it absolutely came
from the boats, but we’re not saying it absolutely didn’t.”
Without definitive evidence of an attempted kamikaze attack, the Charlatan issued his own threat saying that Iran would suffer serious consequences if it attacked US warships.

'Toontime

"I'd turn the glass over for you kid, but Congress won't let me." cartoon credit: Jim Morin

Beyond Dirty Tricks

At the risk of sounding like an asshole: the continuing impasse at the Federal Election Commission could cause problems for the only Democratic candidate, John Edwards, who will take federal matching campaign funds. The Commission is frozen in place because of a lack of a quorum. There are four vacancies on the board which have not been filled. The remaining two members cannot conduct official business and federal matching funds could be delayed as a result. Despite stiff opposition from a conservative Democratic Senator Diane Finestein, the Regime has refused to withdraw the nomination of Hans A. von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department civil rights attorney that has created a furor for his history of suppressing minority and Democratic voting rights [1]. The Charlatan placed Spakovsky on the FEC using a recess appointment, but von Spakovsky resigned on New Year's Eve. It was von Spakovsky who came up with the idea of purging election rolls of felons. This process led to the erroneous disenfranchisement of thousands of mostly Democratic voters in Florida prior to the 2000 election. For his clever work in voter suppression, von Spakovsy was rewarded with a front office job at the civil rights division.

Edwards, who has failed to win either Iowa or New Hampshire, is facing a very tough race in South Carolina against the Obamanon. The 50% of South Carolina voters who are black voters are expected to vote for the ethnic candidate. That means Edwards faces a serious competitive disadvantage in the race if he does not have the funds to broadcast his populist message to 23 states before Super Tuesday. The FEC certified on December 20th that Edwards was entitled to receive $8,825,424.82 in federal matching funds. Is this Mexican standoff what pundit Chris Edwards cryptically referred to when he said, "the Democratic establishment will put out the fire of insurgency"? The corporate suzerainty of American politics will never be broken until the dominate role of corporate campaign contributions are removed or drastically reduced.[2]
[1] http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/26/spakovsky-primer/
[2]http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/berman