- Dear Professor Hanson,
-
- I just saw you on C-SPAN basically putting forth the
Zionist (JINSA) agenda (more about such is included below) in wanting to
invade Iraq as the following email (that I had recently sent to the producers
of the Wolf Blitzer program on CNN) applies to you as well. If you are
so concerned about brutal dictators (and there is no doubt that Saddam
Hussein has been one), why are you not saying anything about the oppressive
dictators that the USA has been doing business with in the former Soviet
Republics (however, brutal oppression by the dictators there conveniently
does not seem to be a concern to the people in the Bush regime because
of the oil deals that have been worked out there in the favor of their
oil business cronies). Also, the brutal oppression of the Palestinian people
does not seem to be much of a concern to you either (because you certainly
did not mention such on C-SPAN). Also, Hamid Karzai had worked for an American
oil company and was conveniently put in place as the head of Afghanistan
by the Bush regime (is that proposed Afghan oil pipeline finally going
to go through now?!).
-
- Also, in the military history course (s) that you are
teaching at the United States Naval Academy, have you mentioned the intentional
and brutal Israel attack on the USS Liberty (in which 34 American sailors
were murdered with 171 more wounded)? If not, I would like to know why
not? Especially after the Navy Times article (which appeared in the Marine
Times as well) last summer which conveyed that the Naval Court of Inquiry
into the USS Liberty attack was a sham and a fraud (as you can read via
the following URL) and that the attack was indeed deliberate:
-
- USS LIBERTY MASSACRE: ISRAEL'S DIRECT ATTACK ON AMERICA:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2209
-
- In addition, if you think sitting in the Pentagon has
the same risk as conducting urban warfare in Baghdad, I will be the first
to pay the way for JINSA Zionist (extremist) chicken hawks like Richard
Perle and Paul Wolfowitz to get there to lead the first troops in.
-
- The following is the email that I had sent to the producers
of Wolf Blitzer's CNN program recently as I have still not received a reply
from them:
-
- Subj: Daily Telegraph (UK newspaper): Bush Will Attack
Iraq without UN Backing Date: 1/13/03 3:13:31 PM Pacific Standard Time
-
- To: eric.sherling CC: wolf@cnn.com, carrie.conner, wolf.blitzer,
lateedition
-
-
-
- Pro-Israel lackey Stephen Hayes of the "Weekly Standard"
publication (of Bill Kristol who is the editor and is also one of the Zionist
extremist chicken hawks who have been pushing Bush Jr. to invade Iraq for
Israel for years) was just on with Wolf Blitzer (on CNN) pushing the (JINSA-Jewish
Institute of National Security Affairs) Zionist extremist agenda for an
invasion of Iraq. Who was he trying to pull one over on? Uninformed Americans,
perhaps..
-
- Zionist planned Iraq 'regime change' before Bush Jr.
became President:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1970
-
- Here is the "Men from JINSA and CSP" article
by Jason Vest (from "The Nation" magazine in the USA) which I
had mentioned (as this article is a MUST READ at your earliest convenience):
-
- http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest&c=1
-
- The following article by Robert Fisk mentions the JINSA
Zionist (extremist) agenda as well:
-
- http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=332011
-
- According to what is mentioned via the following URL,
it appears that Mr. Blitzer might be a Perle crony as well (so no wonder
JINSA has never been mentioned on any of his CNN programs):
-
- JINSA ZIONIST RICHARD PERLE (AT PENTAGON) DRIVING US
TO WAR:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1343
-
-
- What is interesting about the following is that US public
support for an invasion of Iraq (without UN approval) is only at 27 percent
according to a CNN poll taken within the last several weeks (as a recent
poll by Knight Ridder has only 34 percent of Americans supporting an invasion
of Iraq without UN approval!). So JINSA Zionist extremist (and chicken
hawk as well) Richard Perle (and his cronies in the US and Israel) has
the audacity to mention (in the UK Daily Telegraph article included at
the following URL and below as well) that the USA will conduct an invasion
of Iraq (even without UN approval and with very low US public support to
go along with such):
-
- Why is Blair Poodling with the BUSH (JINSA) Zionists
for War:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2374
-
-
- Bush Rejects Aid to States but Will Flow Billions to
Israel:
-
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2316
-
-
- Forwarded:
-
- Subj: Daily Telegraph (UK newspaper): Bush Will Attack
Iraq without UN Backing Date: 1/13/03 1:50:01 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: <mailto:MORRIS434>MORRIS434 To: <mailto:steve.majors@msnbc.com>steve.majors
-
-
- Dear Mr. Majors,
-
- Thank you for your time on the telephone this now...
The Robert Fisk article (for "The Independent" newspaper in the
UK) is included via the following URL:
-
- ROBERT FISK: ISRAELI AT US LOAN TALKS IS IMPLICATED IN
MASSACRE:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2295
-
- The following article (by Robert Fisk as well) eloquently
mentions the pro-Israel media/press bias in the USA (which is driving US
to war in Iraq as well):
-
- Robert Fisk: Fear and Learning in America:
-
- http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=285777
-
- Robert Fisk: America's case for war is built on blindness,
hypocrisy and lies:
- http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=333275
-
- The other articles (which I mentioned on the telephone
this now as well) are included below in full (after the following URL's):
-
-
- Zionist Richard Perle : 'Inspections Or Not, We'll Attack
Iraq':
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1368
-
-
-
- Sharon faces coup by his own party (more about this Zionist
extremist JINSA agenda can be found via the following URL):
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2343
-
-
-
- The following articles confirm what we already know about
Richard Perle who is associated with that JINSA (Jewish Institute of National
Security Affairs) Zionist extremist agenda which has wanted an attack on
Iraq for years (well before the tragic World Trade Center attack):
-
-
- Bush Will Attack Iraq 'Without UN Backing'
-
- By Toby Hamden The Daily Telegraph - UK 1-12-3
-
-
- WASHINGTON, DC -- America will not delay a war with Iraq
until the autumn and is prepared to launch military action against Saddam
Hussein without further United Nations authorization, a senior Bush administration
adviser said yesterday.
-
- Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy
Board and a hawk whose views carry considerable weight, rejected suggestions
from British ministers and senior Foreign Office officials that plans for
an early war should be put on hold.
-
- Mr. Perle, who is close to Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S.
defense secretary, said he did not expect the UN Security Council to reach
agreement on the use of force but had little doubt that George W. Bush,
the U.S. president, would press ahead regardless and lead a coalition to
victory.
-
- "I'm assuming that we will not get a consensus on
the Security Council but it may be possible to get it," he said. "It
would be a great mistake to become dependent on it and take the view that
we can't act separately.
-
- Driving force behind U.S. foreign policy
-
- "That would be an abrogation of the president's
responsibility." Mr. Perle stressed that as an outside adviser he
could not speak for the Bush administration. But with Mr. Rumsfeld and
his ally Vice-President Dick Cheney, now the driving force behind U.S.
foreign policy, his pronouncements have taken on increasing importance.
-
- Mr. Perle said inspectors would not find actual weapons
in the face of Iraqi concealment. "If that's the test, we're never
going to find a smoking gun," said Mr. Perle. He criticized Hans
Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, for his handling of the inspections.
He said inspectors had mainly visited previously known sites.
-
- Mr. Perle suggested that American patience with the UN
inspections process was limited and closely linked to the military timetable
that makes it very difficult to fight a war after March because of the
searing heat.
-
- UN resolution useful in producing cover for invasion
He said: "If there's no change in Saddam's attitude I think there'll
be a reluctance to continue this without a clear indication that our patience
will be rewarded by a UN Security Council consensus. "A consensus
would be a useful thing, and I think we'd be willing to wait a little longer
to get it but not a long time."
-
-
- Mr. Perle said America had been right to go to the UN
to seek Resolution 1441, passed unanimously in November, because it "produced
a consensus in support of significant demands," but the UN had only
a limited role in dealing with Saddam.
-
- "The question now, of course, is whether the UN
having done that [passed 1441] will insist that its demands be met or revert
to its previous posture which was to pass resolutions but not take the
actions necessary to ensure compliance with them."
-
- Claims moral justification for war
-
- He expressed doubt that Tony Blair had asked or would
ask Mr. Bush to delay war until the autumn and accused those who sought
such a delay of being opposed to ousting Saddam in any event.
-
- Mr. Perle said: "There are nations on the UN Security
Council against taking military action, so they will try to slow any movement
towards military action." America and its allies, he insisted, already
had the legal and moral justification for war. "We might be acting
without a resolution from the UN authorizing it, but I think the administration
can make a strong case that Saddam's defiance of a variety of resolutions
passed previously could be understood to justify military action."
-
-
- http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-johnson12jan12,0,235=
991.story?coll=3Dla%2Dnews%2Dcomment%2Dopinions
-
- WAR
-
- San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Original article is at http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/01/1559346.php.
Print comments.
-
- PILGER: Neocons and their plans for war by John Pilger
? Friday January 10, 2003 at 02:38 PM
-
-
- Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround
George W Bush said what America needed was "a new Pearl Harbor".
Its published aims have, alarmingly, come true. : John Pilger :12 Dec 2002
-
-
- The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations
and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written
more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for
America to dominate much of humanity and the world's resources, it said,
was "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor".
The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the "new Pearl Harbor",
described as "the opportunity of ages". The extremists who have
since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right
groups and "think-tanks" were established to avenge the American
"defeat" in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda:
to justify the denial of a "peace dividend" following the cold
war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the
American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have
since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the
current Bush regime.
-
- One of George W Bush's "thinkers" is Richard
Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke
about "total war", I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently
used the term again in describing America's "war on terror".
"No stages," he said. "This is total war. We are fighting
a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about
first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq... this is entirely
the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go
forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever
diplomacy, but just wage a total war... our children will sing great songs
about us years from now."
-
- Perle is one of the founders of the Project for the New
American Century, the PNAC. Other founders include Dick Cheney, now vice-president,
Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary,
I Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, William J Bennett, Reagan's education
secretary, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush's ambassador to Afghanistan. These
are the modern chartists of American terrorism. The PNAC's seminal report,
Rebuilding America's Defences: strategy, forces and resources for a new
century, was a blueprint of American aims in all but name. Two years ago
it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so that Washington
could "fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars".
This has happened. It said the United States should develop "bunker-buster"
nuclear weapons and make "star wars" a national priority. This
is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should
be a target. And so it is.
-
- As for Iraq's alleged "weapons of mass destruction",
these were dismissed, in so many words, as a convenient excuse, which it
is. "While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate
justification," it says, "the need for a substantial American
force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam
Hussein." How has this grand strategy been implemented? A series of
articles in the Washington Post, co-authored by Bob Woodward of Watergate
fame and based on long interviews with senior members of the Bush administration,
reveals how 11 September was manipulated.
-
- On the morning of 12 September 2001, without any evidence
of who the hijackers were, Rumsfeld demanded that the US attack Iraq. According
to Woodward, Rumsfeld told a cabinet meeting that Iraq should be "a
principal target of the first round in the war against terrorism".
Iraq was temporarily spared only because Colin Powell, the secretary of
state, persuaded Bush that "public opinion has to be prepared before
a move against Iraq is possible". Afghanistan was chosen as the softer
option. If Jonathan Steele's estimate in the Guardian is correct, some
20,000 people in Afghanistan paid the price of this debate with their lives.
-
- Time and again, 11 September is described as an "opportunity".
In last April's New Yorker, the investigative reporter Nicholas Lemann
wrote that Bush's most senior adviser, Condoleezza Rice, told him she had
called together senior members of the National Security Council and asked
them "to think about 'how do you capitalise on these opportunities'",
which she compared with those of "1945 to 1947": the start of
the cold war. Since 11 September, America has established bases at the
gateways to all the major sources of fossil fuels, especially central Asia.
The Unocal oil company is to build a pipeline across Afghanistan. Bush
has scrapped the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, the war crimes
provisions of the International Criminal Court and the anti-ballistic missile
treaty. He has said he will use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states
"if necessary". Under cover of propaganda about Iraq's alleged
weapons of mass destruction, the Bush regime is developing new weapons
of mass destruction that undermine international treaties on biological
and chemical warfare.
-
- In the Los Angeles Times, the military analyst William
Arkin describes a secret army set up by Donald Rumsfeld, similar to those
run by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger and which Congress outlawed. This
"super-intelligence support activity" will bring together the
"CIA and military covert action, information warfare, and deception".
According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld, the new organisation,
known by its Orwellian moniker as the Proactive Pre-emptive Operations
Group, or P2OG, will provoke terrorist attacks which would then require
"counter-attack" by the United States on countries "harbouring
the terrorists".
-
- In other words, innocent people will be killed by the
United States. This is reminiscent of Operation Northwoods, the plan put
to President Kennedy by his military chiefs for a phoney terrorist campaign
- complete with bombings, hijackings, plane crashes and dead Americans
- as justification for an invasion of Cuba. Kennedy rejected it. He was
assassinated a few months later. Now Rumsfeld has resurrected Northwoods,
but with resources undreamt of in 1963 and with no global rival to invite
caution. You have to keep reminding yourself this is not fantasy: that
truly dangerous men, such as Perle and Rumsfeld and Cheney, have power.
The thread running through their ruminations is the importance of the media:
"the prioritised task of bringing on board journalists of repute to
accept our position".
-
- "Our position" is code for lying. Certainly,
as a journalist, I have never known official lying to be more pervasive
than today. We may laugh at the vacuities in Tony Blair's "Iraq dossier"
and Jack Straw's inept lie that Iraq has developed a nuclear bomb (which
his minions rushed to "explain"). But the more insidious lies,
justifying an unprovoked attack on Iraq and linking it to would-be terrorists
who are said to lurk in every Tube station, are routinely channelled as
news. They are not news; they are black propaganda.
-
- This corruption makes journalists and broadcasters mere
ventriloquists' dummies. An attack on a nation of 22 million suffering
people is discussed by liberal commentators as if it were a subject at
an academic seminar, at which pieces can be pushed around a map, as the
old imperialists used to do.
-
- The issue for these humanitarians is not primarily the
brutality of modern imperial domination, but how "bad" Saddam
Hussein is. There is no admission that their decision to join the war party
further seals the fate of perhaps thousands of innocent Iraqis condemned
to wait on America's international death row. Their doublethink will not
work. You cannot support murderous piracy in the name of humanitarianism.
Moreover, the extremes of American fundamentalism that we now face have
been staring at us for too long for those of good heart and sense not to
recognise them.
-
- pilger.carlton.com/print/124759 add your comments ------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2000-2002 San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center. Unless
otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial
reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are
those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the SF IMC.
Disclaimer | Privacy
-
- ????????????????????????????????????
-
-
- Agenda Unmasked
-
- Deposing Hussein was a distant dream for administration
officials -- until 9/11.
-
- By Chalmers Johnson Chalmers Johnson is the author of
"Blowback" and the forthcoming book "The Sorrows of Empire:
How the Americans Lost Their Country."
-
- January 12 2003
-
- DEL MAR -- In the hours immediately after the Sept. 11
attacks, long before anyone was certain who was responsible for them, Secretary
of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld reportedly asked that plans be drawn up for
an American assault on Iraq. The following day, in a Cabinet meeting at
the White House, Rumsfeld, according to Bob Woodward, insisted that Iraq
should be "a principal target of the first round in the war against
terrorism." The president reportedly was advised that "public
opinion has to be prepared before a move against Iraq is possible"
and instead chose Afghanistan as a much softer target.
-
- At first consideration, Rumsfeld's early targeting of
Iraq seems odd. Too little was known, too much uncertain. But the Defense
secretary's desire to attack Iraq was neither impulsive nor reactive. In
fact, ever since the first American war against Iraq in 1991, Rumsfeld
and others who planned and executed that war have wanted to go back and
finish what they started. They said so in reports written for then-Secretary
of Defense Dick Cheney in the last years of the George H.W. Bush administration,
and they continued the push when they were out of power during the Clinton
years. In the spring of 1997, their efforts coalesced when Rumsfeld, Cheney
and others joined together to form the Project for the New American Century,
or PNAC, and began concerted lobbying for regime change in Iraq.
-
- In an open letter to President Clinton dated Jan. 26,
1998, the group called for "the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime
from power," and in a letter dated May 29, 1998, to then-Speaker of
the House Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott
(R-Miss.), they complained that Clinton had not listened to them and reiterated
their recommendation that Hussein be overthrown. They added, "We should
establish and maintain a strong U.S. military presence in the region, and
be prepared to use that force to protect our vital interests in the [Persian]
Gulf -- and, if necessary, to help remove Saddam from power."
-
- Signatories to one or both letters included Rumsfeld;
William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard magazine and
chairman of the PNAC; Elliott Abrams, the convicted Iran-Contra conspirator
whom President Bush last year named director of Middle Eastern policy for
the National Security Council; Paul D. Wolfowitz, now Rumsfeld's deputy
at the Pentagon; John R. Bolton, now undersecretary of state for arms control;
Richard N. Perle, now chairman of the Defense Science Board; Richard Armitage,
now Colin Powell's deputy at the State Department; and Zalmay Khalilzad,
former Unocal Corp. consultant and now special envoy to Afghanistan.
-
- In addition to the letters, the PNAC made its opinions
known in reports, speeches, position papers and books. In the fall of 1998,
Wolfowitz addressed the House National Security Committee, chiding the
Clinton administration for not mustering "the necessary strength of
purpose" to "liberate ourselves, our friends and allies in the
region, and the Iraqi people themselves, from the menace of Saddam Hussein."
When George W. Bush became president, many core PNAC loyalists found themselves
once again government insiders, returning to important positions of power
in American foreign policy. They expected that the radical changes in U.S.
military policy they favored would have to come slowly in the absence of,
as the PNAC report "Rebuilding America's Defenses" put it, a
"catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor."
On Sept. 11, 2001, they got their Pearl Harbor.
-
- Still, the Bush administration could not just go to war
with Iraq without tying it in some way to the 9/11 attacks. It instead
launched an easy war against Afghanistan, where there was at least a demonstrable
connection between Osama bin Laden and the Taliban regime -- although it
can be argued that United States policies contributed more to Bin Laden's
development as a terrorist than Afghanistan ever did. Meanwhile, the White
House launched one of the most extraordinary propaganda campaigns of modern
times to convince the American public that Hussein possesses weapons of
mass destruction and presents an imminent danger to the U.S.
-
- Since the return of U.N. weapons inspectors to Iraq,
and the distinct possibility that they may come up empty-handed, Rumsfeld
has paved the way for ignoring their findings with his sophistry that "the
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Bush has repeatedly
stressed his willingness to "go it alone" in Iraq -- meaning,
presumably, without either U.N. sanctions or European allies.
-
- And he may well have to. Many of Iraq's neighbors in
the region -- Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Jordan, to name some of
the most important -- are likely to back away from allowing the U.S. to
use their bases as their populations become convinced that the U.S., rather
than Hussein, presents the greatest danger.
-
- The Bush administration says that the huge U.S. buildup
of weapons, airplanes, ships and soldiers in the Gulf region is necessary
to demonstrate to Hussein that the U.S. means business. Officials reiterate
frequently that the preparations in no way mean that war is inevitable.
I suspect, instead, that the war lovers have succeeded in putting their
not-so-secret plan to conquer Iraq into operation and that we will soon
have to live with the consequences of their adventurism. If you want other
stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives. For
information about reprinting this article, go to www.lats.com/rights.
-
- After reading the above, could this Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney
cabal (with their Likud cronies in Israel) have been involved with 9/11
(especially as such will apparently result in what they have wanted for
so long with the coming invasion of Iraq):
-
- 9/11 Hijacker Attended US military School:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1968
-
- Again, if the JINSA Zionist extremists (of the Perle/Wolfowitz/Cheney
cabal) get their way of bringing about "transfer" with their
Likud cronies (Netanyahu and company) when the invasion of Iraq begins,
the Middle East has the potential to turn into complete turmoil.. I have
been in touch with the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office as well,
and the staff members (in the Israel department there) didn't even know
what JINSA was (despite the following article by Robert Fisk of the London
Independent newspaper which one would think someone there would have read
when it first appeared):
-
- http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=332011
-
- As you read via the following officials in the US government
have conspired with Israeli officials to cover Israeli treachery against
America:
-
- USS LIBERTY MASSACRE: ISRAEL'S DIRECT ATTACK ON AMERICA
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=2209
-
- In a message dated 1/12/03 7:34:53 PM Pacific Standard
Time, Mik writes:
-
- Subj:Re: Concern of "Tranfer" Increases as
Sharon Faces Coup By His Own Party
- Date:1/12/03 7:34:53 PM Pacific Standard Time
- From:<mailto:Mikaeel9>Mik
-
-
- So here we have the evidence that Richard Perle and Paul
Wolfowitz
- work both in the U.S. Defense Department, and also work
in the JINSA
- think tank, that is making up these evil plans alongside
some of the other
- "tips of the iceberg" think tanks made up of
people I wouldn't let date
- my dog.
-
- Mik
-
- In a message dated 1/12/3 5:24:50 PM, MORRIS434 writes:
-
- "That would be right in accordance with the radical/extremist
JINSA (Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs) Zionist agenda of
Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz.. Perle has been an advisor to Netanyahu,
and that extremist JINSA agenda (which Perle and Wolfowitz follow) calls
for all of Palestine to become Israel as I am obviously referring to the
West Bank and Gaza here... This is another reason that these JINSA Zionist
extremists in the Bush regime have wanted to initiate the attack on Iraq
for years (in order to give Israel the opportunity to "transfer"/ethnically
cleanse the Palestinians from the occupied territories into neighboring
Jordan).
-
- However, with the potential of the Labour party candidate
(General Mitsna if I am spelling his name correctly here) winning the upcoming
election, the "transfer" (ethnic cleansing) of the Palestinians
(which the extremist JINSA Zionists in the Bush regime like Perle and Wolfowitz
along with their Likud cronies in Israel such as Netanyahu would like to
see manifest when the invasion of Iraq gets underway) can not really happen
in the coming invasion of Iraq because General Mitzna's position is for
the Israelis to pull out of the Palestinian territories (in order to create
a Palestinian state there).. This is a very serious situation for the Palestinians
and for acheiving peace in the Middle East if this Likud leadership change
(to Netanyahu who is even more extreme than Sharon) takes place before
the election:
-
- The Threat of "Transfer" (Ethnic Cleansing)
in Israel and Palestine:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1609
-
- Here is the "Men from JINSA (Jewish Institute of
National Security Affairs) and CSP" article by Jason Vest (from "The
Nation" magazine in the USA) which I had mentioned (as this article
is a MUST READ at your earliest convenience):
-
- http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020902&s=vest&c=1
-
- Sharon's War:
-
- http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1876
|