Monday, July 17, 2006

NeoCON Okey-Doke

NeoCON Okey-Doke

“Despite questions of dual loyalties, neocons hold high positions in the Bush regime. Ten years ago these architects of American foreign and military policy spelled out how they would use deception to achieve "important Israeli strategic objectives" in the Middle East. First, they would focus "on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq." This would open the door for Israel to provoke attacks from Hezbollah. The attacks would let Israel gain American sympathy and permit Israel to seize the strategic initiative by ‘engaging Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon.’” We're Being Set Up for Wider War in the Middle East by Paul Craig Roberts

It’s no secret the most ardent and rabid warmongers in the Bu$h administration are Zionist Ashkenazim who have long standing ties with the fanatical right wing Lukid Party which controls Israeli politics. These people have formed the intellectual hub of what are called the NeoCons; supposedly a modern version of the AmeriKKKan conservative movement. These men were instrumental in forging powerful cultural and political alliances amongst right wing think tanks, influential foundations, the media, Christian fundamentalists and the Republican Party although their philosophical bedfellows also inhabit the Democratic wing of the Plutocratic two party AmeriKKKan political system. Most of their goals and strategies are attributed to the Project For A New American Century an unabashedly militaristic interventionist cabal who sought to wrest control of the AmeriKKKan foreign and military policy making process from the less imperialistic Clintonesque philosophical group and reestablish a Reagan type philosophy, only much more aggressive. Men like Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Robert Kagan, Elliott Abrams and others have been advocates for unbridled AmeriKKKan imperialism under the guise of “national security”. Their philosophy always included neutralizing Israel’s pan-Arab neighbors via regime change in Iraq, Iran and Syria. “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by:

* striking Syria’s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan.

* paralleling Syria’s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.

* striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.

Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a ‘Brotherhood Agreement’ in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama.” A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000.
The signers of this document, taken from the document itself were: Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader, James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS, Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates, Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy,David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University. As you can see the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies Study Group Paper entitled A Clean Break has advocated Israeli incursions into Lebanon and Syria for years. In addition to that, the Ashkenazim fully intend to suck AmeriKKKa into its’ web of intrigue and entanglement, the very type of trap unfolding right before our eyes! “In recent years, Israel invited active U.S. intervention in Israel’s domestic and foreign policy for two reasons: to overcome domestic opposition to ‘land for peace’ concessions the Israeli public could not digest, and to lure Arabs — through money, forgiveness of past sins, and access to U.S. weapons — to negotiate. This strategy, which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles is should neither have nor want. Israel can make a clean break from the past and establish a new vision for the U.S.-Israeli partnership based on self-reliance, maturity and mutuality — not one focused narrowly on territorial disputes. Israel’s new strategy — based on a shared philosophy of peace through strength — reflects continuity with Western values by stressing that Israel is self-reliant, does not need U.S. troops in any capacity to defend it, including on the Golan Heights, and can manage its own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.” ibid
The NeoCONs are working feverishly to further the Israeli imperialist agenda. The corporatist mind control apparatus is depicting Israel as the weak aggrieved victims in all this and the Arab and Muslim countries not under the direct control of Uncle Sam like Egypt, Jordan Saudi Arabia are, as ravenous villains. The PNAC and like minded organizations are working hard to convince their fundamentalist Christian allies to continue backing Israel in this even as Israel ruthlessly unleashes massive air strikes against civilian and vital infrastructure targets in Lebanon and Palestine. These air strikes and tank incroachments were planned weeks before the capture of low grade Israeli soldiers in Gaza and Lebanon! So this whole scenario is not, I repeat; is not in response to the capture of Israeli soldiers! “On September 20, 2001, PNAC sent an open letter to Bush that commended his newly declared war on terrorism and urged him not only to target Osama bin Laden but also other ‘perpetrators,’ including Saddam Hussein and Hezbollah. The letter made one of the first arguments for regime change in Iraq as part of the war on terror. According to the PNAC letter, ‘It may be that the Iraqi government provided assistance in some form to the recent attack on the United States. But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.’ The letter also pointed out that to undertake this new war, it would be necessary to inject more money into the U.S. defense budget: ‘A serious and victorious war on terrorism will require a large increase in defense spending. Fighting this war may well require the United States to engage a well-armed foe, and will also require that we remain capable of defending our interests elsewhere in the world. We urge that there be no hesitation in requesting whatever funds for defense are needed to allow us to win this war.’ Including the first PNAC letter on the war on terrorism, PNAC published four letters to Bush from 2001 to 2003. In April 2002, PNAC sent Bush a letter regarding ‘Israel and the War on Terrorism,’ followed on November 25, 2002, by a letter about Hong Kong, and a January 23, 2003 letter on increasing the military budget. In March 2003, PNAC published two statements on ‘Post-War Iraq.’”
The PNAC on the outside and in the media working in cahoots with the Zionist NeoCONmen within the Bu$h administration are responsible for much of the disinformation about Iraq’s WMD and their non-existent ties to 9-11 and al Qaeda. The are the ones who actively promoted the lies and beat the war drums in the corporate media for the illegal and ill-conceived invasion and occupation of Iraq. They are doing the same thing now regarding Iran. While things have not gone well at all for the NeoCONmen in Iraq; they are regrouping under the guise of defending their “ally in the Middle East” as the various PNAC and Clean Break papers and letters predicted. The consequence of all this disingenuousness is, their policies are bankrupting this nation, morally and fiscally; and the poor will suffer the most. The NeoCONs couldn’t prod Bu$h to attack Iran directly so now they are advocating a back door war in support of Israel who is clearly the heavy-handed aggressor in all this! Don’t go for the okey-doke, don’t allow the NeoCONS to continue to lie to us and hoodwink us by calling up, down, aggression, defense and war peace. Don’t allow them to execute the nefarious agendas of cunningly sly, chicken hawk NeoCON warmongers at the world’s expense.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home