topic by
real watcher
8/17/2002 (19:27) |
|
by Ahmed Amir
In the January 1975 issue of Commentary, Robert Tucker promoted the radical
notion of invading Arab oil fields. It is worth noting that Commentary is a
publication of the American Jewish Committee and is edited by Norman Podhoretz,
one of the movers and shakers in the neo-conservative movement. The article
was titled 'Oil: The Issue of American Intervention'. Last week, a protégé of
Richard Perle urged the Pentagon to again consider the military conquest of Gulf
oil fields.
The man who made the presentation at the Defense Department was Laurent
Murawiecz, a French resident alien and a 'security analyst' with the Rand Corp. This
'Middle East expert' used to do research for LaRouche, a right wing cult figure who
believes the queen of England makes her money in the cocaine trade. When
Perle's 'expert' urged the Pentagon to add Saudi Arabia to the axis of evil, he was
just dusting off an old Yiddish supremacist plot to deprive the Arabs of their oil.
The 'new' idea was 'leaked' to the press to make sure that the Saudis got the
essential message to worry less about Iraq or the Palestinians and concentrate on
retaining their own vital assets. No one needs to remind them that American bases
are already firmly planted in the Kingdom to facilitate such a rapid takeover.
After accusing the Saudis of 'supporting our enemies and attacking our allies',
Murawiecz advised US officials to target Saudi Arabia's economic assets should the
Saudis refuse to comply with certain ultimatums, including a ban on Islamic
charities and 'anti-Israeli' writings. Once the oil fields and Saudi investments in
the United States were confiscated, the Saudis would be advised that their holy
places were not immune and that 'alternatives are being canvassed'. According to
Murawiecz's recommendations, the United States should advise Muslim pilgrims to
find another destination for their holy ritual, away from the precious oil fields. This
particular Likudnik belongs to the 'bomb Mecca and Medina' faction in Perle's
Pentagon.
While the Pentagon was leaking out Richard Perle's latest Gulf venture, Donald
Rumsfeld was trying to score a few points with the Israeli Lobby by denying that
there was any kind of Israeli occupation. Apparently the whole matter is a figment
of Palestinian imagination. Sharon's occupation goons are illusions, just boy
scouts on a picnic in the Casbah. Just because they murder twenty Palestinians a
week and keep a million residents under curfew is no reason to deprive them of
their 'right' to have a free hand in the 'so-called occupied territory'. Rumsfeld also
allowed that he didn't have a problem with exclusive Jewish settlements and
exclusive Jewish roads on confiscated Palestinian lands.
Now, what does Rumsfeld propose we call the occupied territories? What kind of
vocabulary does he use to describe a place where a murderous foreign military
force enforces a 100-day curfew against the entire population, except Jews? How
does he describe a situation where children are deliberately starved and every
aspect of economic life is assaulted? Does he have an opinion on the siege of
Palestinian communities that has converted the West Bank into hundreds of
isolated penal colonies? In Rumsfeld's dictionary, what are the correct words to use
for Israeli collective punishment against the native population of the Holy Land?
Has he bothered to inquire about the fate of the 8,000 'administrative' prisoners
rounded up in the last few weeks? Since he made it plainly clear that Israel should
continue to hold onto the land, what does he suggest they do with the natives?
Does he subscribe to Richard Armey's ethnic cleansing ideas? Does he approve of
the notion that the Palestinians should be 'transported' off their ancestral lands?
Where to? Or is Rumsfeld proposing that the Israelis annex the West Bank and
Gaza and make the residents Israeli citizens? Is he for a bi-national state or just
another ethnic cleanser? Since he has such a big mouth, why doesn't he come
forward with a few answers to some very basic questions? And where exactly is the
American press corps or are they still busy covering Chandra Levy and the sharks.
Rumsfeld is and old hand on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Under the Reagan
administration, he was a 'special envoy' to the Middle East. Back then, he didn't
think there was a problem with Israeli occupation and his actual mission was to do
nothing about it. So, he meant what he said and he said it to rock the boat and let
the world know that the United States is not going to do a damn thing for the
Palestinians, except to finance and encourage Sharon's expansionist visions.
Once again, the Arab world is demanding an apology from the Bush
administrations for what Rumsfeld said and for what the Pentagon 'expert' said. In
fact, they should be grateful to Rummy for revealing the actual policy of the
United States, as opposed to the deceptive official mantras.
If the United States had wanted to end the Israeli occupation, it would not have
lasted thirty-five years. It took the first Bush administration only seven months to
get Iraqi troops out of Kuwait. If America were opposed to the illegal Jewish
settlement project, they would not have passed thirty-five budgets with generous
funding for the Israeli occupation army and every last brick in every last
settlement. Every single American administration since the Johnson administration
has turned a blind eye to systematic human rights violations in the occupied
territories. The US government has a full inventory of every house demolition,
every murdered child, every acre of confiscated land, every assassination, every
roadblock, every siege and every Israeli war crime. The Bush administration is fully
aware of the systematic destruction of vital infrastructure, including power grids,
schools and even churches and mosques. The American intelligence community
has an uncensored file of every single war crime committed by Ariel Sharon, from
Qibya to Sabra and Shatilla to Jenin, Nablus and Gaza. But they continue to hand
over American tax money to Israel and they continue to give Sharon green lights
to pulverize and decimate the Palestinians. From day one, their policy has been to
'let them bleed'. Of course, both Sharon and Bush counted on the Palestinians to
do all the bleeding and the Palestinians would not oblige.
To understand American policy, it is worth probing the character of the policy
makers who design Rumsfeld's foreign policy. The three architects of American
foreign policy are Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. They will go down in
Palestinian history as the true 'axis of evil'. Wolfowitz and Perle are card carrying
Yiddish supremacist Israel Firsters with a resume that entitles them to the highest
ranks of the fanatical expansionist wing of the Likud party. Their current strategy
is to divert attention from the Palestinian struggle for freedom by beating the war
drums for an assault against Iraq. Their real agenda is to allow Sharon more time
to 'win' against Palestinian resistance to Israeli repression. Like Sharon, they
believe that there is a level of repression that can be continually and permanently
inflicted on the Palestinian people to force them to capitulate to every Likudnik
real estate fantasy.
Why is Rumsfeld so belligerent against the Palestinians and the Arabs? Why did
he assemble a team of 'Middle East experts' from the extremist fringe of the
Yiddish Supremacy movement Well, Because Perle and Wolfowitz are haters and
that jives with Rumsfeld's core emotions, which are a quilt designed from a fabric
of ethnic hate. He is comfortable with his Yiddish supremacist advisers because his
whole history suggests a personality that is quite at ease with racist dogma. In
four terms as a US congressman from Illinois in the 1960s, his voting record
earned a perfect 100 per cent rating from conservative groups. A rating like that
means he didn't vote for the Civil Rights bill. Conservative Illinois in the 1960s is
a place that meant his father probably belonged to the Klu Klux Klan and that
Rumsfeld got elected with Klan support. Rumsfeld is the kind of guy who grew up
going to Klan rallies with his daddy. I don't know how he felt about lynching back
then, but if he wants to see some hard core racist Israeli goons that will make him
wet his white sheet, he can go hang around the 'so-called occupied territories' for a
few days with his war criminal paramour, Ariel Sharon.
Gerald Kaufman, a Labour Member of Parliament, had the best description for this
administration. In a recent Spectator article, he called Bush 'the most intellectually
backward American President of my lifetime'. And he described Bush's advisers as
a team 'whose bellicosity is exceeded only by their political, military and
diplomatic illiteracy'. His remarks were mainly targeted at Rice and Rumsfeld. I
wander what he has to say about Rumsfeld's adviser, Richard Perle, who depends
on a LaRouche French resident alien, Laurent Murawiecz, to give Pentagon slide
shows on invading Saudi oil fields and relocating Mecca and Medina.
|
|