Bush Regime Gearing Up for Attack on Syria and Beyond...
The following is an email sent to Syrian Deputy Ambassador Imad Moustapha in
the USA (it is important to note that not all Jewish people are Zionist
extremists just as not all Christians are Zionist extremists either):
Dear Mr. Moustapha,
Thank you for your reply. I did indeed see your appearance on BBC World News
last week as I also watched you on the NBC "Meet the Press" this morning and
thought that you handled the interview very well (despite the apparent bias
of Mr. Russert who had no time for what you were accurately mentioning about
the double standard for Israeli weapons of mass destruction-per paragraph 14
of UN Security Council Resolution 687 which the US government prefers to
conveniently ignore along with the ongoing illegal Israeli occupation of the
I have been in touch with MP Tam Dalyell (who is the Father of the House of
Commons and is a very decent man) about how the JINSA/PNAC Zionist extremists
(in the Bush regime) and their cronies in the US press/media are gearing up
for a potential attack on Syria (and beyond which is in accordance with the
Zionist extremist JINSA agenda which Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard
Perle, Douglas Feith and others are associated with). Mr. Dalyell is very
concerned about such and is going to address the issue in the House of
Commons tomorrow (and plans to mention that former Secretary of State
Lawrence Eagleburger stated on BBC this weekend that President Bush should be
impeached if the USA attacks Syria and that Prime Minister Blair should be as
well if he "poodles" along with Bush for such an invasion). Please review the
following BBC article about what Secretary of State Colin Powell has
The following includes additional articles which convey the JINSA agenda
(which is to attack your country as well):
Friday, April 11, 2003
WASHINGTON — With Syria under fire for helping Saddam Hussein's regime,
President Bush weighed in publicly Friday, saying Iraq's neighbor needs to
refuse refuge to Saddam loyalists.
U.S. ADVISER PERLE WARNS SYRIA OVER IRAQI WEAPONS
LONDON, April 12 (Reuters) - Pentagon adviser Richard Perle, a key
architect of the U.S.-led drive to topple Saddam Hussein, said in remarks
published on Saturday Syria would be a possible military target if it was
found harbouring Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
In an interview with the International Herald Tribune newspaper, Perle said
that if such weapons were found on Syrian soil "I'm quite sure we would
have to respond to that."
"It would be an act of such foolishness on Syria's part," Perle said.
"Our first approach would be to demand that the Syrians terminate that
threat by turning over anything they have come to possess and failing that,
I don't think anyone would rule out the use of any of our full range of
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has accused Syria of transporting
military equipment to its neighbour Iraq and described its support for
Saddam's rule as a "hostile act."
Washington launched its invasion of Iraq three weeks ago to uncover and
destroy alleged weapons of mass destruction, including biological and
No firm evidence of such weapons has been found yet.
But Perle said he did not doubt Iraq possessed such weapons...
Syria Warned - Perle Sees
More 'Preemption' In Future
By Barry James
© 2002 The International Herald Tribune
PARIS -- Richard Perle, one of the chief U.S. ideologists behind the war to
oust Saddam Hussein, warned Friday that the United States would be compelled
to act if it discovered that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction have been
concealed in Syria. Perle said that if the Bush administration were to
learn that Syria had taken possession of such Iraqi weapons, "I'm quite sure
that we would have to respond to that." "It would be an act of such
foolishness on Syria's part," he continued, "that it would raise the question
of whether Syria could be reasoned with. But I suppose our first approach
would be to demand that the Syrians terminate that threat by turning over
anything they have come to possess, and failing that I don't think anyone
would rule out the use of any of our full range of capabilities." In an
interview with editors of the International Herald Tribune, Perle said that
the threat posed by terrorists he described as "feverishly" looking for
weapons to kill as many Americans as possible obliged the United States to
follow a strategy of preemptive war in its own defense. Asked if this meant
it would go after other countries after Iraq, he replied: "If next means who
will next experience the 3d Army Division or the 82d Airborne, that's the
wrong question. If the question is who poses a threat that the United States
deal with, then that list is well known. It's Iran. It's North Korea. It's
Syria. It's Libya, and I could go on." Perle, a Pentagon adviser as a
member of the Defense Policy Board, said the point about Afghanistan and now
Iraq was that the United States had been put in a position of having to use
force to deal with a threat that could not be managed in any other way. The
message to other countries on the list is "give us another way to manage the
threat," he said, adding, "Obviously, our strong preference is always going
to be to manage threats by peaceful means, and every one of the countries on
the 'who's next?' list is in a position to end the threat by peaceful means."
"So the message to Syria, to Iran, to North Korea, to Libya should be
clear. if we have no alternative, we are prepared to do what is necessary to
defend Americans and others. But that doesn't mean that we are readying the
troops for a next military engagement. We are not." The former official in
Republican administrations said the United States also has "a serious
problem" with Saudi Arabia, where he said both private individuals and the
government had poured money into extremist organizations. "This poses such
an obvious threat to the United States that it is intolerable that they
continue to do this," he warned. He said he had no doubt that Iraq
possessed weapons of mass destruction. "We will not find them unless we
stumble across them," he said, "until we are able to interview those Iraqis
who know where they are. The prospect of inspections may have had the effect
of causing the relocation of the weapons and their hiding in a manner that
would minimize their discovery, which I believe will turn out to mean burying
things underground in inaccessible places." He added that the speed of the
coalition advance, "may have precluded retrieving and using those weapons in
a timely fashion." Asked if the United States was doomed to follow a policy
of preemption alone, Perle replied that it is necessary to restructure the
United Nations to take account of security threats that arise within borders
rather than are directed across borders. "There is no doubt that if some of
the organizations that are determined to destroy this country could lay their
hands on a nuclear weapon they would detonate it, and they would detonate in
the most densely populated cities in this country, with a view to killing as
many Americans as possible, " he said. Yet there was nothing in the UN
charter authorizing collective preemption to avoid such threats. "I think
the charter could say that the terrorist threat is a threat to all mankind,"
Perle said. Perle said resentment over France's opposition to the war ran
so deep in the United States that he doubted there could ever be a basis for
constructive relations between the two governments. "When you have both the
government and the opposition agreed on one thing, which is that they are not
sure whether they want Saddam Hussein to win, that is a shocking development
and Americans have been shocked. The freedom fries and all the rest is a
pretty deeply held sentiment. I am afraid this is not something that is
easily patched and cannot be dealt with simply in the normal diplomatic way.
because the feeling runs too deep. it's gone way beyond the diplomats."
Perle said he had no doubt the world is safer than it was a month ago. "The
idea that liberating Iraq would spawn terrorists all over the Muslim world I
think will be proven to be wrong, and it will be proven to be wrong by the
Iraqis themselves . We are about to learn what life has been like under
Saddam Hussein. Even in the tough world we are living in, people are going to
be shocked about the depravity and sadism of the Saddam regime." Perle said
there were good reasons to support the Middle East peace process, but not in
a way that suggests the United States has caused damage by the war in Iraq.
"The sense that we somehow owe this to the Arab world only diminishes the
essential truth about what we've done in Iraq," he said. "We have not damaged
Arab interests. We have advanced them by freeing 25 million people from this
brutal dictatorship." © 2002 The International Herald Tribune style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=12
Bush Adds to U.S. Litany Against Syria
By SCOTT LINDLAW
.c The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush warned Syria on Sunday not to harbor Iraqi
leaders and charged that Damascus has chemical weapons.
``People have got to know that we are serious about stopping the spread of
weapons of mass destruction,'' Bush said.
``We expect cooperation, and I'm hopeful we'll receive cooperation,'' he told
reporters after returning to the White House from Camp David.
Some top administration officials made plain the administration is
increasingly frustrated by Syria.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the majority of foreign fighters in
Iraq were from Syria, brought in by the ``busloads.'' On one bus, military
authorities found leaflets that offered rewards for killing Americans, and
several hundred thousand dollars, Rumsfeld said on the CBS program ``Face the
Rumsfeld also said top members of Saddam's government had fled to Syria.
U.S.-led forces captured one of Saddam Hussein's half brothers in northern
Iraq, and said he was planning to cross the border to Syria.
Rumsfeld last month warned Syria to stop sending military equipment -
including night-vision goggles - to Iraqi forces, saying ``We consider such
trafficking as hostile acts and will hold the Syrian government accountable
for such shipments.''
Asked Sunday whether Syria had heeded those demands, Rumsfeld said, ``Not
Bush and Rumsfeld were ambiguous about what price Syria might pay for defying
the United States, but seemed eager to make sure that Damascus understood the
message in the coalition's toppling of Saddam.
Noting during an appearance on NBC's ``Meet the Press'' that Syria is on the
State Department's list of countries that sponsor terrorism, Rumsfeld said:
``Being on the terrorist list is not some place I'd want to be. The (Syrian)
government's making a lot of bad mistakes, a lot of bad judgments calls, in
my view, and they're associating with the wrong people.''
Following Rumsfeld on the NBC show, Syria's deputy ambassador to the United
States, Imad Moustapha, said the administration's flurry of charges was a
``campaign of misinformation and disinformation'' meant to divert attention
from the ``human catastrophes'' taking place in wartime Iraq.
Moustapha called the administration's charges ``false accusations.''
No member of the Iraqi leadership has fled into Syria, he said.
However, Iraq's U.N. ambassador, Mohammed Al-Douri, arrived in Syria
Saturday, a day after leaving New York. It was not immediately clear when or
whether he would return to Iraq.
Friday, April 11, 2003
As the U.S. learned from the first Gulf War, once a war is begun, it
be finished. Failure to finish the task and leave unfinished business will
only lead to problems later.
Menacing remarks about Syria by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his
deputy, Paul Wolfowitz indicate they see the likely payback for that country’
s perfidy during the Iraq war as an onslaught
of carrier based aircraft and an invading force of tanks.
The Rumsfeld camp claimed Iraqi irregulars had come from Syria to fight in
northern Iraq and that Syria was providing weapons to Baghdad -- both warlike
acts. Reports in the media even had the Pentagon whipping up plans for a
possible invasion of Syria and undersecretaries burning the midnight oil
composing fresh policy papers highlighting how Syria's support of terrorist
groups threatens the region.
Once the U.S. takes interim charge in Iraq, it will hold the purse strings
that can throttle Syria into obeisance.
Iraq: Key to Syria's Economic Health
The fact is that over the past few years Iraq has been one of Syria's largest
export markets and vital to its flagging economy. The disruption of trade in
terms of oil, agricultural and industrial goods -- brought on by the war
alone -- could amount to annual losses to Syria of as high as $2 Billion.
Standing by itself, the oil issue is potentially catastrophic for Syria’s
economy. In those halcyon days before the invasion and the soon to come
American payback, the illegal Iraqi oil flow was the Golden Goose of the
U.N. sanctions to the Devil, Syria gobbled up bootlegged Saddam oil at a
discount of up to 50 percent of market value. This happy state of affairs
permitted Syria to sell more of its own premium-priced crude at a windfall --
rather than consuming it at home.
Not that Syria was alone in turning a blind eye to the U.N. sanctions. Jordan
was happy to gulp 100,000 barrels a day, with U.S. ally Turkey taking its
share at the rate of 50,000 barrels a day. All told during last year alone,
Iraq smuggled some 450,000 barrels a day outside the U.N. oil-for-food
Oil Under the Bridge
However, what will really cost Syria its payback of economic sanctions is how
that underground railroad of oil featured a two-way street of betrayal.
The offending northern pipeline that carries crude from Iraq's northern
fields to Syria's Souedieh area was (and perhaps still is) pumping away at
the rate of 20,000 barrels a day. Supplementing the pipeline, a railway
between Syria and Iraq transported relatively small amounts of oil.
Furthermore, according to Western intelligence sources, that same railway
transported bartered-in-exchange-for-oil military equipment back to Iraq.
Ironically, Syria, fast earning its stripes as an associate member of the
Axis of Evil, was not always in bed with Iraq. The two countries went to the
brink of war in 1975 in a border dispute over the Euphrates River. Syria
stood fast with Iran during the long and bloody Iran-Iraq war. Furthermore,
Syria was a salient in the international force that pushed Iraq out of Kuwait
during the 1991 Gulf War.
But after signing a lucrative free-trade pact with Iraq in 2000, Syria felt
well disposed enough towards the dictatorship to lobby the U.N. to end
sanctions against Iraq.
Paybacks Are Hell
And the rest is history -- with the most unpalatable part yet to be eaten by
Syria as its free trade heyday with Iraq perhaps dwindles to the role of most
The House has already passed an amendment to the nearly $80 billion emergency
war spending bill that bars French, German, Russian and Syrian companies from
any of the $2.8 billion in the budget appropriated for rebuilding Iraq.
Meanwhile, Syria continues to march, refusing to aid in the capture of
Hussein and his henchmen:
"The United States Army has secured the Iraqi borders with Syria since the
early days of this conflict," said Imad Moustapha, Syria's deputy ambassador
to United States, in an interview with CNN Thursday.
"They are the ones that are controlling those borders. Let them decide who
... they want to go into Syria or stay in Iraq."
Moustapha said Syria has a liberal immigration policy, and did not deny that
Al-Douri was in Syria.
The deputy ambassador also invited international inspectors to scour his
country, but seemed to tie the offer to similar inspections elsewhere in the
region, including in Israel.
Asked about reports that Syria would welcome international inspectors to
ascertain that Syria does not posses weapons of mass destruction, Shaaban
said in her Al-Jazeera interview: ``I don't know who is the source of this
report. I am surprised by it.''
For additional articles, please access the "Israel" message board via the
> The Night After: The Easier the Victory, the Harder the Peace By URI AVNERY
> It is now fashionable to talk about "the day after". Let's talk about the
> night after. After the end of hostilities in Iraq, the world will be faced
> with two decisive facts: First, the immense superiority of American arms
> can beat any people in the world, valiant as it may be. Second, the small
> group that initiated this war--an alliance of Christian fundamentalists and
> Jewish neo-conservatives--has won big, and from now on it will control
> Washington almost without limits. The combination of these two facts
> constitutes a danger to the world, and especially to the Middle East, the
> Arab peoples and the future of Israel. Because this alliance is the enemy
> of peaceful solutions, the enemy of the Arab governments, the enemy of the
> Palestinian people and especially the enemy of the Israeli peace camp. It
> does not dream only about an American empire, in the style of the Roman
> one, but also of an Israeli mini-empire, under the control of the extreme
> right and the settlers. It wants to change the regimes in all Arab
> countries. It will cause permanent chaos in the region, the consequences of
> which it is impossible to foresee. Its mental world consists of a mixture
> of ideological fervor and crass material interests, an exaggerated American
> patriotism and right-wing Zionism. That is a dangerous mixture. There is in
> it something of the spirit of Ariel Sharon, a man who has always had
> grandiose plans for changing the region, consisting of a mixture of
> creative imagination, unbridled chauvinism and a primitive faith in brute
> force. Who are the winners? They are the so-called neo-cons, or
> neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish.
> They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the
> think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and
> the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers. For many years, this was a
> marginal group that fostered a right-wing agenda in all fields. They fought
> against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and drugs. When Binyamin
> Netanyahu assumed power in Israel, they offered him advise on how to fight
> the Arabs. Their big moment arrived with the collapse of the Twin Towers.
> The American public and politicians were in a state of shock, completely
> disoriented, unable to understand a world that had changed overnight. The
> neo-cons were the only group with a ready explanation and a solution. Only
> nine days after the outrage, William Kristol (the son of the group's
> founder, Irving Kristol) published an Open Letter to President Bush,
> asserting that it was not enough to annihilate the network of Osama bin
> Laden, but that it was also imperative to "remove Saddam Hussein from
> power" and to "retaliate" against Syria and Iran for supporting Hizbullah.
> Following is a short list of the main characters. (If it bores you, skip to
> the next section). The Open Letter was published in the Weekly Standard,
> founded by Kristol with the money of ultra-right press mogul Rupert Murdoch
> , who donated $ 10 million to the cause. It was signed by 41 leading
> neo-cons, including Norman Podhoretz, a Jewish former leftist who has
> become an extreme right-wing icon, editor of the prestigious Encounter
> magazine, and his wife, Midge Decter, also a writer, Frank Gaffney of the
> Center for Security Studies, Robert Kagan, also of the Weekly Standard,
> Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post, and, of course, Richard Perle.
> Perle is a central character in this play. Until recently he was the
> chairman of the Defense Policy Board of the Defense Department, which also
> includes Eliot Cohen and Devon Cross. Perle is a director of the Jerusalem
> Post, now owned by extreme right-wing Zionists. In the past he was an aide
> to Senator Henry Jackson, who led the fight against the Soviet Union on
> behalf of the Jews who wanted to leave. He is a leading member of the
> influential right-wing American Enterprise Institute. Lately he was obliged
> to resign from his Defense Department position, when it became known that a
> private corporation had promised to pay him almost a million dollars for he
> benefit of his influence in the administration. That Open Letter was, in
> effect, the beginning of the Iraq war. It was eagerly received by the Bush
> administration, with members of the group already firmly established in
> some of its leading positions. Paul Wolfowitz, the father of the war, is
> No. 2 in the Defense Department, where another friend of Perle's, Douglas
> Feith, heads the Pentagon Planning Board. John Bolton is State Department
> Undersecretary. Eliot Abrams, responsible for the Middle East in the
> National Security Council, was connected with the Iran-Contra-Israel
> scandal. The main hero of the scandal, Oliver North, sits in the Jewish
> Institute for National Security Affairs, together with Michael Ledeen,
> another hero of the scandal. He advocates total war not only against Iraq,
> but also against Israel's other enemies, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the
> Palestinian Authority. Dov Zakheim is comptroller for the Defense
> Department. Most of these people , together with Vice-President Dick Cheney
> and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, are associated with the "Project for
> the New American Century", which published a White Paper in 2002, with the
> aim 'to preserve and enhance this 'American peace'"--meaning American
> control of the world. Meyrav Wurmser (Meyrav is a chic new Israeli first
> name) is Director of the Center for Middle East Policy at the Hudson
> Institute. She also writes for the Jerusalem Post and is co-founder of the
> Middle East Media Research Institute that is, according to the London
> Guardian, connected with Israeli Army Intelligence. MEMRI feeds the media
> and politicians with highly selective quotations from extreme Arab
> publications. Meyrav's husband, Davis Wurmser, is at Perle's American
> Enterprise Institute, heading Middle East Studies. Mention should also be
> made of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy of our old
> acquaintance, Dennis Ross, who for years was in charge of the "peace
> process" in the Middle East. In all the important papers there are people
> close to the group, such as William Safire, a man hypnotized by Sharon, in
> the New York Times and Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post. Another
> Perle friend, Robert Bartley, is the editor of the Wall Street Journal. If
> the speeches of Bush and Cheney often sound as if they came from the lips
> of Sharon, one of the reasons may be that their speechwriters, Joseph
> Shattan, Mathew Scully and John McConnell, are neo-cons, as is Cheneys
> Chief-of-Staff, Lewis Libby. The immense influence of this largely Jewish
> group stems from its close alliance with the extreme right-wing Christian
> fundamentalists, who nowadays control Bush's Republican party. The founding
> fathers were Jerry Falwell of the Moral Majority, who once got a jet plane
> as a present from Menachem Begin, and Pat Robertson of the Christian
> Coalition and the Christian Broadcasting Network, which help to finance the
> Christian Embassy in Jerusalem of J.W. van der Hoeven, an outfit that
> supports the settlers and their right-wing allies. Common to both groups is
> their adherence to the fanatical ideology of the extreme right in Israel.
> They see the Iraq war as a struggle between the Children of Light (America
> and Israel) and the Children of Darkness (the Arabs and Muslims). By the
> way, none of these facts are secret. They have been published lately in
> dozens of articles, both in American and world media. The members of the
> group are proud of them. The Zionist general. The man who symbolizes this
> victory is General Jay Garner, who has just been appointed chief of the
> civilian administration in Iraq. He is no anonymous general who has been
> picked accidentally. Garner is the ideological partner of Paul Wolfowitz
> and the neo-cons. Two years ago he signed, together with 26 other officers,
> a petition organized by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs,
> lauding the Israeli Army for "remarkable restraint in the face of lethal
> violence orchestrated by the leadership of the Palestinian Authority,"
> which is certainly news to the Israeli peace forces. He also stated that "a
> strong Israel is an asset that American military planners and political
> leaders can rely on." In the first Gulf War he praised the performance of
> the Patriot missiles, which had failed miserably. After leaving the army in
> 1997, he became, not surprisingly, a defense contractor specializing in
> missiles. It was alleged that he landed non-competitive Pentagon contracts.
> This year he obtained a defense contract for $ 1.5 billion, as well as a
> contract for building Patriot systems in Israel. Therefore, there can be no
> better candidate for the job of chief of the civilian administration in
> Iraq, especially at a time when contracts for billions of dollars for
> reconstruction have to be handed out, to be paid for by Iraqi oil. A new
> Balfour declaration. The ideology of this group, that calls for an American
> world-empire as well as for a Greater Israel, reminds one of bygone days.
> The Balfour declaration of 1917, that promised the Jews a homeland in
> Palestine, had two parents. The mother was Christian Zionism (among whose
> adherents were illustrious statesmen like Lord Palmerston and Lord
> Shaftesbury, long before the foundation of the Zionist movement), the
> father was British imperialism. The Zionist idea allowed the British to
> crowd out their French competitors and take possession of Palestine, which
> was needed to safeguard the Suez Canal and the shorter sea route to India.
> Now the same thing is happening again. Last year Richard Perle organized a
> briefing in which a speaker proposed war not only on Iraq, but on Saudi
> Arabia and Egypt as well, in order to secure the world's oil heartland.
> Iraq, he asserted, was only the pivot. One of the justifications for this
> design is the need to defend Israel. To bet on our life? Seemingly, all
> this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America.
> Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of
> world power. But this tendency troubles me. We are like a gambler, who bets
> all his money and his future on one horse. A good horse, a horse with no
> current competitor, but still one horse. The neo-cons will cause a long
> period of chaos in the Arab and Muslim world. The Iraqi war has already
> shown that their understanding of Arab realities is shaky. Their political
> assumptions did not stand the test, only brute force saved their
> undertaking. Some day the Americans will go home, but we shall remain here.
> We have to live with the Arab peoples. Chaos in the Arab world endangers
> our future. Wolfowitz and Co. may dream about a democratic, liberal,
> Zionist and America-loving Middle East, but the result of their adventures
> may well turn out to be a fanatical and fundamentalist region that will
> threaten our very existence. The partnership of the neo-cons and the
> Christian fundamentalists may engender counter-forces in Washington. And if
> Bush is defeated in the next election, like his father after his victory in
> the first Gulf War, this whole gang will be thrown out. The Bible tells us
> about the kings of Judea, who relied on the then world power, Egypt. They
> did not appreciate the rise of forces in the east, Assyria and Babylon. An
> Assyrian general told the king of Judea: "Behold, thou trustest upon the
> staff of this bruised reed, upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go
> into his hand and pierce it." (II kings 18, 21). Bush and his gang of
> neo-cons is not a bruised reed. Far from it, he is now a very strong reed.
> But should we bet our whole future on this? Uri Avnery is an Israeli
> journalist. His essays are included in The Other Israel: Voices of Refusal
> and Dissent.
> April 10, 2003
> Bush to Install Zionist Sympathizer to Rule Iraq
> George W. Bush has plans to appoint General Jay
> Garner, a well known lackey of the Jewish Institute
> for National Security Affairs (JINSA), to govern
> post-war Iraq. General Garner is a "hardliner" on
> dealing with the Palestinians in their struggle to
> free their occupied land.
> "I honestly think when Iraqis find out they are
> going to be genuinely appalled," said Hussein Ibish,
> a spokesman for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination
> "There have been well over 2,000 Palestinians killed in
> the past two years and the Iraqis know who killed
> them," said Professor Rashid Khalidi, who specialises
> in Middle Eastern history at the University of Chicago.
> General Garner has very a close relationship with
> many of Vice President Dick Chenney's business
> partners. The vice president recently announced that
> the United States soon would convene meetings in Iraq
> to begin planning for the "interim authority" that is
> expected to run the country. One plan is to restore
> once abandoned oil pipelines from Iraq to Haifa,
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> La Voz de Aztlan
Some Brief Background of JINSA
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:51:28 -0700 From: Jeffrey Blankfort
There has lately been a great deal written in the media about the
heretofore little known organization JINSA or the Jewish Institute for
National Security Affairs founded by Richard Perle in 1976. The year was
not insignificant. In the previous year, Pres. Gerald Ford, advised by
Henry Kissinger, stopped aid to Israel for six months when it refused to
withdraw from the Sinai which it had occupied in the 1973 war. Ford was
so angry he announced that he was going to make a major speech in which
he was going to reassess and downgrade US-Israel relations.
When AIPAC got wind it, it drafted a very strong letter warning Ford
against doing something so rash, and 76 senators signed it. Ford never
made the speech and like every other president who crossed "lobby" he
was defeated by Carter in 1980 (who also crossed "the lobby" on several
occasions and ended up getting the lowest Jewish vote in modern
times-42%} when he lost to Reagan. (Thanks to the Israel lobby's control
over Congress, Israel no longer can have its aid delayed. It gets it all
in one lump sum in October each year, right after the budget passes.)
"Our media, our sheltering parents" Date: Friday, March 14, 2003
By Gabriel Ash YellowTimes.org Columnist (United States)