May 25, 2005
As a primary example how AIPAC runs the foreign policy of the United States, consider Dana Milbank’s AIPAC’s Big, Bigger, Biggest Moment ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05
/23/AR2005052301565.html?referrer=emailarticle ... ), published in the Washington Post. Milbank tells us: at the annual meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, held in Washington recently, the pro-Israel "political action committee" (or rather a political bribery and intimidation, to say nothing of espionage, committee or more accurately racket) is "here to stay" (according to Howard Kohr, executive director), that is to say no niggling little investigation by the FBI will put a kink in the pressure camarilla’s operations. Getting busted stealing U.S. secrets, according to Kohr, is no big deal, although it is a "test of [AIPAC’s] collective resolve" in its effort to dominate U.S. foreign policy in the name of Israel.
Condi Rice and "congressional leaders" were in attendance, according to Milbank. "AIPAC is a demanding crowd, and even Rice, introduced as a 'very special friend,’ did not satisfy universally. The participants applauded heartily her reminder that Bush did not meet with Arafat, but when she said Arafat’s successor, Mahmoud Abbas, 'is committed to both freedom and security,’ and when she mentioned more U.S. funds for Palestinians, the room was quiet." In other words, for the AIPAC faithful, helping out the Palestinians in any way is seriously frowned upon—no doubt a lot of them feel the same way Ariel Sharon and the Likudites do: the Palestinians (or "beasts walking on two legs," as the warm and fuzzy former PM of Israel, Menachem Begin, once characterized them) should expect nothing, maybe a few more "operations" (collective punishment and mass murder), and they should most definitely think about emigrating, maybe to Antarctica. Obviously, there is nothing Mahmoud Abbas can do except convince his people to walk across the desert, maybe with a bit of prodding from the munificent IDF, and settle in western Iraq or maybe somewhere in Jordan (AIPACers and Zionists consider Jordan the "real" home of the Palestinians, although none of them have ever lived there, or very few of them did until Israel ran them out of the country at gunpoint in 1948).
Milbank tells us "the attendees overall showed an impressive ideological discipline—right down to AIPAC’s multimedia show, 'Iran’s Path to the Bomb,’ in the convention center’s basement" (in Washington, a lot of things happen in basements; ask Oliver North: http://www.webslingerz.com/eclauset/mediasouth/project/cu/cu
3.html ). AIPAC and well-placed Zionists in the Pentagon and White House have a fixation about Iran and its supposed desire to get its hands on a couple nuclear bombs, ostensibly to "push the Jews into the sea" by way of radiation.
The exhibit, worthy of a theme park, begins with a narrator condemning the International Atomic Energy Agency for being "unwilling to conclude that Iran is developing nuclear weapons" (it had similar reservations about Iraq) and the Security Council because it "has yet to take up the issue." In a succession of rooms, visitors see flashing lights and hear rumbling sounds as Dr. Seuss-like contraptions make yellowcake uranium, reprocess plutonium, and pop out nuclear warheads like so many gallons of hummus for an AIPAC conference.
Of course, the IAEA was absolutely spot on about Iraq—it did not possess nuclear weapons or, for that matter, many other weapons, or at least not weapons of a threat to Israel (remember Condi’s "smoking gun": http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/01/10/wbr.smoking.gun/ and "mushroom cloud" in response to Hans Blix’s assertion that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, to which stand-up comedian Ari Fleischer replied: "The problem with guns that are hidden is you can’t see their smoke." ).
It is a nostalgic addition for AIPAC to add a yellowcake uranium processor to their circus sideshow… it reminds us of the fiction Saddam was also in pursuit of the fabled yellow cake ( http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/prodhand/sld004.cfm ).
Of particular interest at the AIPAC confab was a "debate" between Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and the Prince of Darkness himself, Richard Perle, former runner-up for the Jonathan Pollard "Sell Out Your Country" Award (he was investigated by the Justice Department and found to have violated US policies relating to unlawful transmission of sensitive classified US information to Israel: http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/55061 ).
Perle drew cheers for denouncing Palestinian anti-Semitism and the French. Harman mentioned that an aide once worked for AIPAC, called her audience "very sophisticated" and celebrated Yasser Arafat’s death as "a blessing." Debating a hard-liner in front of a pro-administration crowd, Harman heaped praise on President Bush, calling the Iraqi elections "sensationally impressive" and moving to "applaud" or "commend" Perle and the administration a dozen times. "Richard is right, and so is President Bush," she said at one point.
But after half an hour of this, Harman could not keep up. Perle provoked cheers from the crowd when he favored a military raid on Iran, saying that "if Iran is on the verge of a nuclear weapon, I think we will have no choice but to take decisive action." When Harman said the "best short-term option" is the U.N. Security Council, the crowd reacted with boos.
In other words, when it comes to Israel and bombing Muslim and Arab nations (and forcing so-called "elections" on them), there is little difference between Democrats and Strausscons such as Richard Perle. It would seem the only difference between to two camps is in regard to Iran—Democrats such as Harman want a check for mass murder written by the United Nations while Perle believes no such check or permission is required and wants the United States to go it alone and bomb Iran in the name of AIPAC and Israel.
Iran will be attacked, maybe next month, possibly down the road a stretch (see Scott Ritter’s analysis: http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2295/2 ). Naturally, this will be an unmitigated disaster since Iran will not stand still and do nothing during and after the bombs fall. "The entire Zionist territory, including its nuclear facilities and atomic arsenal, are currently within range of Iran’s advanced missiles," a senior Iranian official said last August. An attack on Iran "could only be carried out by angry or stupid people.
For that reason, officials of the Islamic Republic must always be prepared to counter possible military threats," declared Yadollah Javani, head of the Revolutionary Guards political bureau ( http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6760.htm ).
"Iran would respond within 15 minutes to any attack by the United States or any other country," an anonymous Iranian official linked to the ruling mullahs told Borzou Daragahi of the San Francisco Chronicle in February ( http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/
21/MNGHUBERIV1.DTL ). "Iranian authorities," Daragahi continues, "say they have been getting ready for a possible attack. Newspapers have announced efforts to increase the number of the country’s 7 million-strong 'Basiji’ volunteer militia, which was deployed in human-wave attacks during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. Iranian military authorities have paraded long-range North Korean-designed Shahab missiles before television cameras." But the Iranians, paying heed to the lessons on guerilla warfare against the United States in Iraq, are not limiting their potential response to conventional military readiness. "Over the last year, they’ve developed their tactics of 'asymmetrical’ war, which would aim not at resisting a penetration of foreign forces, but to then use them on the ground to all kinds of harmful effect," a military expert based in Tehran added. It is also a sure bet the Iranians would stir up trouble in neighboring Iraq if the United States or Israel invaded.
So here’s what Richard Perle and AIPAC are not telling you: if Iran is invaded (or simply bombed) it will respond in kind and this will necessitate a more robust military response by the United States, i.e., more bullet-stoppers will need to be thrown into the mix. Since the Pentagon is having big problems recruiting soldiers (even the cell phone generation, more or less lost in oblivious consumerism, realizes joining the military may translate into serious bodily harm or even death), if all hell breaks loose in Iran and Iraq, as the Iranians warn, the only option will be to kick start conscription, otherwise known as involuntary servitude, or less politely slavery.
In essence, Richard Perle and AIPAC want you to donate your kids (or yourself) to the plan for Greater Israel and the long-envisioned Pax Israelica empire. Perle and the Strausscons realize they cannot attack Iran without a large influx of troops (a fact mentioned by the Strausscon William Kristol ( http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/
107thcongress/01-03-21kristol.html ), who more or less, between the lines, asked for military conscription since brow-beating military recruiters bearing fistfuls of sign-up cash at the local mall or high school are not working out).
Maybe by this time next year, while AIPAC is chewing through "26,000 kosher meals, 32,640 hors d’oeuvres, 2,500 pounds of salmon, 1,200 pounds of turkey, 900 pounds of chicken, 700 pounds of beef and 125 gallons of hummus," as Milbank notates, your 20-something son and daughter will be slumped over MREs (Meals Ready to Eat) in a foxhole somewhere in the Persian desert with deadly depleted uranium blowing around. Since there are 66,622,704 (as of 2002) Iranians, and many of them are young males, and 24,001,816 Iraqis (minus a hundred or more thousand, killed over the last couple years by "our troops" under the vicious guidance of the likes of Donald Rumsfeld), we can expect the (unphotographed) flag-draped caskets to arrive at Dover AFB in record numbers.