| Email this article | Print this article | Link to this Article|
|If you don't get MER, you just don't get it!|
11 August 2004 MER is Free
|News, Views, & Analysis Governments, Lobbies, & the |
Corporate Media Don't Want You To Know
|"Your publication is brilliant, and the best that I've seen anywhere. |
I appreciate both the even-handedness of information and the bite in your editorials.
Mentioning credit where credit is due and blame where blame is due seems to be
such a rarity in reporting on ME issues."
-Alex Uttermann, Boulder Creek, CA
" I hope you endure. The work you are doing is extremely important,
even with what you consider a limited distribution. I know
many people here [in Israel] do get MER."
-Professor Tanya Reinhart, Tel Aviv University
Please keep my subscription, without receiving your Valuable Informative
e-mails, I'll be bewildered in complete darkness.
Kamel Kialni - Sydney, Australia
"I have been reading your writings for some time. They are essential to
any understanding of what is going on in the Middle East."
-Gilbert Gendron - Montréal, Canada
"MER is very honest, very precise, and very truthful.
I got one word for it as a Palestinian: Impressive!"
Upcoming from MER:Iraq war exploding and
U.S./Israel Pushing Iran, Syria, and Muslims everywhere to fight back.
threatens to expand
to Iran and Syria
"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative
Mid-East Realities - MER - www.MiddleEast.Org - 11 August 2004:
intellectuals, most of them Jewish..."
As the Iraq war escalates and creates still more disgust and hatred around the world, it is also threatening to expand. And a month or two from now if the Bush/Cheney/neocon regime is lagging in the polls no telling what kinds of political or military 'surprises' might come from Washington sooner rather than later. Further attempts to provoke the Shiites and Iran -- provocations that all the hallmarks of the CIA, Mossad and the now intertwined neocons in both countries and agencies -- are underway setting the stage for an expanded regional war the Israelis especially are eager to foment maybe sooner rather than later.
But the definition of neocon now used by many, including this Israeli author writing in Ha'aretz over a year ago now, are now too narrow and politically constricted. Democratic Senators Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden (who worked so hard to get fellow Republican Senator John McCain on the ticket with John Kerry) are neocons as well...Biden's attempt to mask this reality becoming more hollow all the time. Under their own well-cultivated masks Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, Malcolm Heinlein, Israel Singer and so many others of those who make up the powerful Israeli-Jewish lobby in the U.S. are also neocons -- albeit less harsh neocons, especially in public, than those who have absconded with that title and so relish in it.
As for Tom Friedman and the so-called 'liberal Jewish intellectual' crowd associated with the Council on Foreign Relations, including many of those associated with Ha'aretz in Israel -- well that's a much more complicated story for another time. But the attempt by many to make other American Jews like Tom Friedman and Dennis Ross the hero anti-thesis of the neocons is not only just plain wrong, it is terribly misguided, historically dangerous, and politically grossly self-serving.
The "White man's burden" title of this article is appropropriate for those who are versed in history. But it would have been much more honest and courageous to have been much more clear and explicit about the extraordinary connections between the Jewish neocons (of all stripes in fact) and Israel. And it would have been much more honest and timely to have titled the article: "Neocons pushing with Israel to expand war to all who oppose their 'New World Order'."
White man's burden
The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history. Two of them, journalists William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, say it's possible. But another journalist, Thomas Friedman (not part of the group), is skeptical (Ha'aretz, 05/04/2003).
By Ari Shavit
1. The doctrine
WASHINGTON - At the conclusion of its second week, the war to liberate Iraq wasn't looking good. Not even in Washington. The assumption of a swift collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime had itself collapsed. The presupposition that the Iraqi dictatorship would crumble as soon as mighty America entered the country proved unfounded. The Shi'ites didn't rise up, the Sunnis fought fiercely. Iraqi guerrilla warfare found the American generals unprepared and endangered their overextended supply lines. Nevertheless, 70 percent of the American people continued to support the war; 60 percent thought victory was certain; 74 percent expressed confidence in President George W. Bush.
Washington is a small city. It's a place of human dimensions. A kind of small town that happens to run an empire. A small town of government officials and members of Congress and personnel of research institutes and journalists who pretty well all know one another. Everyone is busy intriguing against everyone else; and everyone gossips about everyone else.
In the course of the past year, a new belief has emerged in the town: the belief in war against Iraq. That ardent faith was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Eliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history. They believe that the right political idea entails a fusion of morality and force, human rights and grit. The philosophical underpinnings of the Washington neoconservatives are the writings of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Edmund Burke. They also admire Winston Churchill and the policy pursued by Ronald Reagan. They tend to read reality in terms of the failure of the 1930s (Munich) versus the success of the 1980s (the fall of the Berlin Wall).
Are they wrong? Have they committed an act of folly in leading Washington to Baghdad? They don't think so. They continue to cling to their belief. They are still pretending that everything is more or less fine. That things will work out. Occasionally, though, they seem to break out in a cold sweat. This is no longer an academic exercise, one of them says, we are responsible for what is happening. The ideas we put forward are now affecting the lives of millions of people. So there are moments when you're scared. You say, Hell, we came to help, but maybe we made a mistake.
2. William Kristol
Has America bitten off more than it can chew? Bill Kristol says no. True, the press is very negative, but when you examine the facts in the field you see that there is no terrorism, no mass destruction, no attacks on Israel. The oil fields in the south have been saved, air control has been achieved, American forces are deployed 50 miles from Baghdad. So, even if mistakes were made here and there, they are not serious. America is big enough to handle that. Kristol hasn't the slightest doubt that in the end, General Tommy Franks will achieve his goals. The 4th Cavalry Division will soon enter the fray, and another division is on its way from Texas. So it's possible that instead of an elegant war with 60 killed in two weeks it will be a less elegant affair with a thousand killed in two months, but nevertheless Bill Kristol has no doubt at all that the Iraq Liberation War is a just war, an obligatory war.
Kristol is pleasant-looking, of average height, in his late forties. In the past 18 months he has used his position as editor of the right-wing Weekly Standard and his status as one of the leaders of the neoconservative circle in Washington to induce the White House to do battle against Saddam Hussein. Because Kristol is believed to exercise considerable influence on the president, Vice President Richard Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, he is also perceived as having been instrumental in getting Washington to launch this all-out campaign against Baghdad. Sitting behind the stacks of books that cover his desk at the offices of the Weekly Standard in Northwest Washington, he tries to convince me that he is not worried. It is simply inconceivable to him that America will not win. In that event, the consequences would be catastrophic. No one wants to think seriously about that possibility.
What is the war about? I ask. Kristol replies that at one level it is the war that George Bush is talking about: a war against a brutal regime that has in its possession weapons of mass destruction. But at a deeper level it is a greater war, for the shaping of a new Middle East. It is a war that is intended to change the political culture of the entire region. Because what happened on September 11, 2001, Kristol says, is that the Americans looked around and saw that the world is not what they thought it was. The world is a dangerous place. Therefore the Americans looked for a doctrine that would enable them to cope with this dangerous world. And the only doctrine they found was the neoconservative one.
That doctrine maintains that the problem with the Middle East is the absence of democracy and of freedom. It follows that the only way to block people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden is to disseminate democracy and freedom. To change radically the cultural and political dynamics that creates such people. And the way to fight the chaos is to create a new world order that will be based on freedom and human rights - and to be ready to use force in order to consolidate this new world. So that, really, is what the war is about. It is being fought to consolidate a new world order, to create a new Middle East.
Does that mean that the war in Iraq is effectively a neoconservative war? That's what people are saying, Kristol replies, laughing. But the truth is that it's an American war. The neoconservatives succeeded because they touched the bedrock of America. The thing is that America has a profound sense of mission. America has a need to offer something that transcends a life of comfort, that goes beyond material success. Therefore, because of their ideals, the Americans accepted what the neoconservatives proposed. They didn't want to fight a war over interests, but over values. They wanted a war driven by a moral vision. They wanted to hitch their wagon to something bigger than themselves.
Does this moral vision mean that after Iraq will come the turns of Saudi Arabia and Egypt?
Kristol says that he is at odds with the administration on the question of Saudi Arabia. But his opinion is that it is impossible to let Saudi Arabia just continue what it is doing. It is impossible to accept the anti-Americanism it is disseminating. The fanatic Wahhabism that Saudi Arabia engenders is undermining the stability of the entire region. It's the same with Egypt, he says: we mustn't accept the status quo there. For Egypt, too, the horizon has to be liberal democracy.
It has to be understood that in the final analysis, the stability that the corrupt Arab despots are offering is illusory. Just as the stability that Yitzhak Rabin received from Yasser Arafat was illusory. In the end, none of these decadent dictatorships will endure. The choice is between extremist Islam, secular fascism or democracy. And because of September 11, American understands that. America is in a position where it has no choice. It is obliged to be far more aggressive in promoting democracy. Hence this war. It's based on the new American understanding that if the United States does not shape the world in its image, the world will shape the United States in its own image.
3. Charles Krauthammer
Is this going to turn into a second Vietnam? Charles Krauthammer says no. There is no similarity to Vietnam. Unlike in the 1960s, there is no anti-establishment subculture in the United States now. Unlike in the 1960s, there is now an abiding love of the army in the United States. Unlike in the 1960s, there is a determined president, one with character, in the White House. And unlike in the 1960s, Americans are not deterred from making sacrifices. That is the sea-change that took place here on September 11, 2001. Since that morning, Americans have understood that if they don't act now and if weapons of mass destruction reach extremist terrorist organizations, millions of Americans will die. Therefore, because they understand that those others want to kill them by the millions, the Americans prefer to take to the field of battle and fight, rather than sit idly by and die at home.
Charles Krauthammer is handsome, swarthy and articulate. In his spacious office on 19th Street in Northwest Washington, he sits upright in a black wheelchair. Although his writing tends to be gloomy, his mood now is elevated. The well-known columnist (Washington Post, Time, Weekly Standard) has no real doubts about the outcome of the war that he promoted for 18 months. No, he does not accept the view that he helped lead America into the new killing fields between the Tigris and the Euphrates. But it is true that he is part of a conceptual stream that had something to offer in the aftermath of September 11. Within a few weeks after the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, he had singled out Baghdad in his columns as an essential target. And now, too, he is convinced that America has the strength to pull it off. The thought that America will not win has never even crossed his mind.
What is the war about? It's about three different issues. First of all, this is a war for disarming Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. That's the basis, the self-evident cause, and it is also sufficient cause in itself. But beyond that, the war in Iraq is being fought to replace the demonic deal America cut with the Arab world decades ago. That deal said: you will send us oil and we will not intervene in your internal affairs. Send us oil and we will not demand from you what we are demanding of Chile, the Philippines, Korea and South Africa.
That deal effectively expired on September 11, 2001, Krauthammer says. Since that day, the Americans have understood that if they allow the Arab world to proceed in its evil ways - suppression, economic ruin, sowing despair - it will continue to produce more and more bin Ladens. America thus reached the conclusion that it has no choice: it has to take on itself the project of rebuilding the Arab world. Therefore, the Iraq war is really the beginning of a gigantic historical experiment whose purpose is to do in the Arab world what was done in Germany and Japan after World War II.
It's an ambitious experiment, Krauthammer admits, maybe even utopian, but not unrealistic. After all, it is inconceivable to accept the racist assumption that the Arabs are different from all other human beings, that the Arabs are incapable of conducting a democratic way of life.
However, according to the Jewish-American columnist, the present war has a further importance. If Iraq does become pro-Western and if it becomes the focus of American influence, that will be of immense geopolitical importance. An American presence in Iraq will project power across the region. It will suffuse the rebels in Iran with courage and strength, and it will deter and restrain Syria. It will accelerate the processes of change that the Middle East must undergo.
Isn't the idea of preemptive war a dangerous one that rattles the world order?
There is no choice, Krauthammer replies. In the 21st century we face a new and singular challenge: the democratization of mass destruction. There are three possible strategies in the face of that challenge: appeasement, deterrence and preemption. Because appeasement and deterrence will not work, preemption is the only strategy left. The United States must implement an aggressive policy of preemption. Which is exactly what it is now doing in Iraq. That is what Tommy Franks' soldiers are doing as we speak.
And what if the experiment fails? What if America is defeated?
This war will enhance the place of America in the world for the coming generation, Krauthammer says. Its outcome will shape the world for the next 25 years. There are three possibilities. If the United States wins quickly and without a bloodbath, it will be a colossus that will dictate the world order. If the victory is slow and contaminated, it will be impossible to go on to other Arab states after Iraq. It will stop there. But if America is beaten, the consequences will be catastrophic. Its deterrent capability will be weakened, its friends will abandon it and it will become insular. Extreme instability will be engendered in the Middle East.
You don't really want to think about what will happen, Krauthammer says looking me straight in the eye. But just because that's so, I am positive we will not lose. Because the administration understands the implications. The president understands that everything is riding on this. So he will throw everything we've got into this. He will do everything that has to be done. George W. Bush will not let America lose.
4. Thomas Friedman
Is this an American Lebanon War? Tom Friedman says he is afraid it is. He was there, in the Commodore Hotel in Beirut, in the summer of 1982, and he remembers it well. So he sees the lines of resemblance clearly. General Ahmed Chalabi (the Shi'ite leader that the neoconservatives want to install as the leader of a free Iraq) in the role of Bashir Jemayel. The Iraqi opposition in the role of the Phalange. Richard Perle and the conservative circle around him as Ariel Sharon. And a war that is at bottom a war of choice. A war that wants to utilize massive force in order to establish a new order.
Tom Friedman, The New York Times columnist, did not oppose the war. On the contrary. He too was severely shaken by September 11, he too wants to understand where these desperate fanatics are coming from who hate America more than they love their own lives. And he too reached the conclusion that the status quo in the Middle East is no longer acceptable. The status quo is terminal. And therefore it is urgent to foment a reform in the Arab world.
Some things are true even if George Bush believes them, Friedman says with a smile. And after September 11, it's impossible to tell Bush to drop it, ignore it. There was a certain basic justice in the overall American feeling that told the Arab world: we left you alone for a long time, you played with matches and in the end we were burned. So we're not going to leave you alone any longer.
He is sitting in a large rectangular room in the offices of The New York Times in northwest Washington, on the corner of 17th Street. One wall of the room is a huge map of the world. Hunched over his computer, he reads me witty lines from the article that will be going to press in two hours. He polishes, sharpens, plays word games. He ponders what's right to say now, what should be left for a later date. Turning to me, he says that democracies look soft until they're threatened. When threatened, they become very hard. Actually, the Iraq war is a kind of Jenin on a huge scale. Because in Jenin, too, what happened was that the Israelis told the Palestinians, We left you here alone and you played with matches until suddenly you blew up a Passover seder in Netanya. And therefore we are not going to leave you along any longer. We will go from house to house in the Casbah. And from America's point of view, Saddam's Iraq is Jenin. This war is a defensive shield. It follows that the danger is the same: that like Israel, America will make the mistake of using only force.
This is not an illegitimate war, Friedman says. But it is a very presumptuous war. You need a great deal of presumption to believe that you can rebuild a country half a world from home. But if such a presumptuous war is to have a chance, it needs international support. That international legitimacy is essential so you will have enough time and space to execute your presumptuous project. But George Bush didn't have the patience to glean international support. He gambled that the war would justify itself, that we would go in fast and conquer fast and that the Iraqis would greet us with rice and the war would thus be self-justifying. That did not happen. Maybe it will happen next week, but in the meantime it did not happen.
When I think about what is going to happen, I break into a sweat, Friedman says. I see us being forced to impose a siege on Baghdad. And I know what kind of insanity a siege on Baghdad can unleash. The thought of house-to-house combat in Baghdad without international legitimacy makes me lose my appetite. I see American embassies burning. I see windows of American businesses shattered. I see how the Iraqi resistance to America connects to the general Arab resistance to America and the worldwide resistance to America. The thought of what could happen is eating me up.
What George Bush did, Friedman says, is to show us a splendid mahogany table: the new democratic Iraq. But when you turn the table over, you see that it has only one leg. This war is resting on one leg. But on the other hand, anyone who thinks he can defeat George Bush had better think again. Bush will never give in. That's not what he's made of. Believe me, you don't want to be next to this guy when he thinks he's being backed into a corner. I don't suggest that anyone who holds his life dear mess with Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and President Bush.
Is the Iraq war the great neoconservative war? It's the war the neoconservatives wanted, Friedman says. It's the war the neoconservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite. Friedman laughs: I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened.
Still, it's not all that simple, Friedman retracts. It's not some fantasy the neoconservatives invented. It's not that 25 people hijacked America. You don't take such a great nation into such a great adventure with Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard and another five or six influential columnists. In the final analysis, what fomented the war is America's over-reaction to September 11. The genuine sense of anxiety that spread in America after September 11. It is not only the neoconservatives who led us to the outskirts of Baghdad. What led us to the outskirts of Baghdad is a very American combination of anxiety and hubris.
Please forward MER articles to others in their entirety with proper attribution.
We welcome your comments and information in the new MER FORUM.
MID-EAST REALITIES - www.MiddleEast.Org
Phone: (202) 362-5266 Fax: (815) 366-0800 Email: MER@MiddleEast.Org
Copyright © 2004 Mid-East Realities, All rights reserved
||If you don't get MER, you just don't get it!
MER Exclusive - Listen to Douglas Feith about Israel and the Middle East
(August 30, 2004)
MER EXCLUSIVE - Listen to Douglas Feith while Bill Clinton was still President and a year before 9/11 even happened. For some time in Washington Feith himself has been a prominent member of the extended Israeli-Jewish lobby speaking at times as harshly and unrelentingly as any Israeli propagandist. Persons in the media should contact MER for more extensive information and additional audio and video comments by Feith - 202 362-5266 and press@MiddleEast.Org
Pointing the fingers at Douglas Feith
(August 29, 2004)
Feith has been mentioned in most of the major media stories this weekend in Washington -- but not nearly with the emphasis he should have been. For Feith has played a central role in just about every scandal that has beset the Bush Administration -- from the faulty 'intelligence', to the mistaken 'assumptions', to the prison torture scandals, and now the latest Israeli/Jewish lobby spy scandal right in his own office.
Sharon's Wars, Israel's Future
(August 28, 2004)
This major New York Times feature about Ariel Sharon could have, and should have, been far more harsh. But Ariel Sharon is at the top of his game now. And though the future he may have molded more than any other may be bleak and potentially catastrophic, now is his time and few in the Jewish world -- and in an oblique way that includes not only the New York Times but much of the contemporary American media -- dare to take him on directly.
Israeli Spy Scandal Erupting in Washington
(August 28, 2004)
Many, most no doubt, of these kinds of things relating to Israel never get out into the public domain; they are buried and sucked up into official Washington where so many have so many reasons for always wanting to hush such things up. But there should be no doubt that the Israelis have infiltrated at many levels and greatly influenced in many ways U.S. policies in the Middle East, especially of late the decision to invade and occupy Iraq.
The following quick list of past Israeli spy scandals all of which were covered up or sucked in one way or another include:
* Israeli Attack on U.S.S. Liberty - 1967
* Steve Bryent Israeli Spying Scandal - 1982
* Jonathan Pollard Arrested outside Israeli Embassy - 1985
* AIPAC infiltration scandal, President forced to resign - 1991
* Mossad bugging of Clinton and Monica - 1997
* Martin Indyk's Security Clearances 'temporarily' suspended - 2000
America's 'Iraqi Police' and the now impending Iraqi Elections
(August 27, 2004)
And it's clear that if it's a competiton between Negroponte and Allawi, against al-Sistani and al-Sadr, the Americans and their regime are in big trouble. Just how the U.S. occupation is going to attempt to either further delay the election or not-too-blantantly manipulate and control it now looms ahead -- just as soon as the American election is behind us all.
(August 26, 2004)
U.S. and Regime Bombing and Killing throughout Iraq
(August 26, 2004)
Chaos, confusion, death, and destruction -- that's the description of American occupied Iraq as the country virtually rebels and explodes. Even as Ayatollah al-Sistani heads back to Najaf protected by British occupation troops American occupation troops are ferociously attacking Najaf, Fallujah, Sadr City as never before and American armed and paid Iraqi mercenary troops are massacreing their own.
Daily Articles Summary - 25 August 2004
(August 25, 2004)
Daily Articles Summary - 25 August 2004
Sistani Returns and March on Najaf Looms
(August 25, 2004)
Now on this very day in history there is another Ayatollah in and at the heart of the Middle East at a crucial moment in time. The very term 'Ayatollah' was hardly known in the West before the Iranian revolution just 25 years ago now. But in the immediate days ahead it now appears Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is to have his and maybe modern on-its-knees Iraq's 'rendevous with history'. And then what this is really all about now is the future rather than the past, especially with Iraqi 'elections' supposed to take place just 5 months from now. What will the American Empire with its arsenal of planes, tanks, and shock troops now do to deter, deflect, or stop him? What will the U.S.-installed and protected Allawi regime in Baghdad now do to attempt to co-opt or twist him?
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani Returns to 'Save the Burning Holy City'
(August 25, 2004)
The Mahdi Army defeated the British Empire in Sudan in 1885. Now a Mahdi Army battles the American Empire in Iraq in 2004. Today the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani returns to Najaf to "Save the Burning Holy City".
IRAQ, IRAN and ISRAEL Stories -- 24 August 2004
(August 24, 2004)
Crusades II - Iraqi Cities Bombed and Tanked
(August 24, 2004)
Bush's views and ongoing rhetoric -- and then came top Pentagon General Boykin telling the world that 'my god is bigger than their god' -- may come to define this period in 'modern' history.
(August 23, 2004)
Provocative thinking and writing from one of Great Britain's most prolific, most outspoken, most humanistic, and most insightful 'activist' journalists writing this cover article in the current issue of the New Statesman. It's too hard and probably wrong in fact to agree that 'Bush may be the lesser evil'. But it is very important to understand how and why John Pilger is speaking out in this way.
Palestinian Struggle Fully Justified
(August 22, 2004)
Because of the huge propaganda war in which the U.S. and Israel also have overwhelming firepower at their disposal, what leading Professors like Charles Black and now Ted Honderich have to say is in fact of critical importance.
Weekend Reading: Iran, the U.S., and Israel
(August 21, 2004)
These four articles from the past few days, especially the first commentary by UPI Senior Analyst Martin Sieff, help put things in perspective and set the stage for what is now to come. Unpleasant and frightening weekend reading, we know...but necessary.
What the Americans have Really Done in and to Iraq
(August 20, 2004)
This is a brief but very important outline of what the Americans have really done in recent years in and to Iraq. All this has little to do with 'freedom' and 'democracy' -- those are the simplistic and deceptive front-words. What's really involved is an increasingly desperate and ruthless master plan to turn Iraq -- a country at the center of both the Arab and the Muslim worlds -- into an appendage of the American military, political, and economic machine trying to more totally control the Middle East region and continue to drain it of its wealth, resources, and heritage. It's the imperialism of old considerably reconstituted for the brave new world of worldwide television, the internet, and high-tech 'Star Wars' weaponry.
Iran Warns of Preemptive Strike Against U.S. and Israel
(August 19, 2004)
"We will consider any strike against our nuclear installations as an attack on Iran as a whole, and we will retaliate with all our strength. Where Israel is concerned, we have no doubt that it
is an evil entity, and it will not be able to launch any military operation without an American green light. You cannot separate the two."
Iranian Defense Minister
The World on Fire
(August 19, 2004)
Now in 2004 as a result of what the Bush/Cheney/Israeli regime insisted on doing the world is dangerously on fire -- passions, hatreds, and fears all now enraged and engaged in an escalating "clash of civilizations" full of crusading rhetoric essentially pitting the U.S., U.K., and Israel against Arab and Muslim countries and peoples everywhere.
U.S. Allawi Regime Should Go
(August 18, 2004)
here's a bottom line here and at a time of such major historic developments it should be said clearly. The American-installed, financed, armed, and protected Allawi regime has already totally disgraced and discredited itself. It cannot succeed in authoritatively and democratically governing Iraq. It should be ended immediately before it does even more historic harm to Iraq, to the Middle East, to the Arab and Muslims worlds, and to the whole fabric of international justice and order.
Al-Sadr and Allawi - The Struggle for the Middle East
(August 18, 2004)
Here then are two such voices speaking out, crying out, at this critical time. The first an American who was Director of The Islamic Center in Washington, the very venue in fact President Bush choose to visit soon after 9/11. The second is a Canadian who is President of the Canadian Islamic Congress. -MER
Sharon the 'Bulldozer', Sharon the 'Butcher'
(August 17, 2004)
These BBC and Guardian articles today look at how the Israelis are even now continuing to expand settlements in the occupied territories, as well as at the current situation in and around Gaza -- realities 'on the ground' that Ariel Sharon is more responsible for than any other single individual on any side of the barricades. MiddleEast.org
"They are cheating us, laughing at us" - MER FlashBack 7 Years
(August 17, 2004)
"In the end, so long as the U.S. continues to back Israeli occupation with ever greater amounts of money, guns, and political protection, little will change and the "peace process" will remain a grand deception breeding resistance, hatred, and yes, more terrorism."
U.S. Iraqi Troops Fire on Reporters
(August 16, 2004)
History is being made in these bitter bleeding days, in these very hours, and the world will have to live with the aftermath for some time to come. This report just published by the Daily Telegraph in the U.K. is the best so far to outline how the Americans are attempting to blind the world and mute the protests by threatening the few courageous journalists still in and able to report from Najaf. As for pictures of what is happening, cameras are now illegal and being confiscated by the Americans and their agents.
Iraq Exploding! The historic confrontation at the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf
(August 16, 2004)
Unless the Americans can find some way to get Muqtada Sadr and his forces out of the historic Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf without a firefight and without a massacre they themselves could become the victims of their own killing machine if the extraordinary rage and hatred in Iraq, Iran, and the Arab and Muslim worlds overall should erupt still further against them.
Americans Order Journalists, Cameras From Najaf
(August 15, 2004)
This is what police-states do; this is what dictators do; this is what the Israelis sometimes do; and now this is what the American 'democracy' does in the extraordinarily duplicitous name of 'freedom and democracy for Iraq.
Israel 'On The Eve of Destruction'?
(August 15, 2004)
His father long headed the National Religious Party. He himself has been the head of the world Zionist movement as well as the Speaker of the Knesset. And yet -- even as the Israelis appear to be victorious with the Palestinians everywhere surrounded, subjugated, dispossessed and controlled -- Avraham Burg dares to speak out loudly about how perverted Zionism has become and that all the militarism, racism, and arrogance could in reality have put Israel 'on the eve of destruction'.
Please tell friends and family about MER
(August 14, 2004)
Mid-East Realties (MER) commentary and analysis is exclusive, hard-hitting, and always directly to the point. The consistent incisiveness, expertise, and depth of coverage is not to be found anywhere else -- as these comments from readers around the world attest. Below is a summary with quick links to recent exclusive MER articles and FlashBacks. Please forward this summary complete to your friends and relatives encouraging them to also get MER just as you do. It's never been easier to subscribe to MER; and it's never been more timely and important to do so.
Occupied Iraq - Threats, resignations, killings, chaos all escalating
(August 13, 2004)
Reports from Iraq this morning indicate that Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr may have been injured today while meeting with supporters, and what's to happen next has everyone on edge as rarely before. Other reports from Iraq are of a wave of protest resignations against the American occupation and puppet government, with increased threats against the U.S. and its regime now coming in public even from other Iraqi officials approved by the Americans.
Nader vs. Israel
(August 12, 2004)
"The days when the chief Israeli puppeteer comes to the United States and meets with the puppet in the White House and then proceeds to Capitol Hill, where he meets with hundreds of other puppets, should be replaced."
(August 12, 2004)
"From Iran's perspective, there is little question what happens in Najaf is its business. Any damage there cannot leave a single Iranian ruler the option of remaining neutral, regardless of whether they are among moderates or hard-liners. The Shiite religious heritage is a shared one between Iraq and Iran."
Hidden History of the "Peace Process"
(August 11, 2004)
"It's not inordinate Chinese money and influence in American politics the Congress should be investigating, it's how Israel manipulates American politics with the help of some key Americans (most of them Jewish), who are in fact, however distasteful it is to say it, 'dually loyal'."
Jewish Washington Neocons Responsible for War
(August 11, 2004)
As the Iraq war escalates and creates still more disgust and hatred around the world, it is also threatening to expand. And a month or two from now if the Bush/Cheney/neocon regime is lagging in the polls no telling what kinds of political or military 'surprises' might come from Washington sooner rather than later.
Stumbling, Bumbling 'Arabist' Ambassadors Play to the Cameras
(August 10, 2004)
After all these now wasted years, and after all this now-squandered money -- and even with all that has happened including 9/11, the Iraqi war, and the Palestinian Intifada -- the 'Arabist' Ambassadors in Washington are weaker and more incestuous, less influential and less credible, then when they started. Yet oh how they continue to pretend otherwise so tragically continuing to mislead so many well-meaning naive people who simply don't know better the real details of what has been and what is now the real situation in today's Washington.
(August 9, 2004)
He sure didn't write this way when he worked for the old gray Zionist lady the New York Times. With language like 'neo-con vampires' he sounds a bit this time like MER in its regular tell-it-like-it-really-is mode... Maybe for his next installment Mr. Ibrahim will have more to say ...about his old colleagues at the New York Times starting with Tom Friedman, et. al.
Both Israel and Saudis working to elect Bush/Cheney
(August 8, 2004)
Now of course neither is going to admit it in front of the cameras, and of course it's also politically confusing for many, but both the Israelis and the Saudis are working hard now to help the election of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and the right-wing neocons.
U.S. and puppet regime boot Aljazeera from Iraq
(August 7, 2004)
Oh yes, the headline..."U.S. boots Aljazeera..." Let's not get confused by all the technical details and propaganda tricks. The regime in Baghdad was selected by the Americans and empowered by the Americans. It is financed by the Americans and the American military and CIA keep it in power. What it does is what the Americans want it to do. And the responsibility for what it does is American as well.
(August 7, 2004)
As tensions and fighting in Iraq and Palestine continue, and with new sanctions and attacks on Syria, Iran, and Lebanon quite publicly threatened, the situation in the greater Middle East could become far more tense and the 'crucial countries' of both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia could indeed 'fall' from the American grip setting off even more dangerous and unpredictable political and military explosions.
Target IRAN con't
(August 6, 2004)
"Exploiting the November US presidential elections and the European concerns, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon could order a strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, similar to the ones Israelis executed in 1981 against Iraq's nuclear weapons program", the diplomats were quoted by the London-based newspaper Al Hayat on Wednesday, August 4.
'Revolution' in Iraq; No U.N. or Muslim Troops To Help Americans
(August 5, 2004)
Indeed, the Americans and the Israrelis have now created their own joint vicious geopolitical stew in the Middle East; and they are very much in danger of gradually boiling away in it regardless of all the tough talk and military onslaughts.
Kerry, Israel, Jews, and the Middle East
(August 4, 2004)
John Kerry's Middle East policies have already been heavily mortgaged, if not downright sold, to those who have the greatest interest and power in controlling what the U.S. does in the crucial Middle East region and in determining where American arms, monies, and covert actions flow in the future -- powerful American Jews closely associated with Israel.
10 YEARS and 1 MILLION+ DEAD and COUNTING - MER FlashBack
(August 3, 2004)
"Here we are in the middle of the millennium year and we are responsible for genocide in Iraq. All of us that live in the silent democracies are responsible for sustained genocide in Iraq."
Former Assistant Secretary General
of the United Nations Denis Haliday
'SECURITY' POLITICS - Para-military troops dressed to kill become props in political war
(August 3, 2004)
A large numbers of 'security forces' dressed to kill in paramilitary uniforms with big guns took to the streets in New York and Washington and are there to stay, say those in charge, 'as long as it takes'. Bush and his are in fact using all this fear, and all these images, as props in their own campaign to retain power.
America Vs America
(August 1, 2004)
"The Bush Administration cannot be trusted...
George W. Bush and his administration have taken normal mendacity to a startling new level far beyond lies of convenience... They traffic in big lies, indulge in any number of symptomatic
small lies, and ultimately, have come to embody dishonesty itself. They are a lie. And people, finally, have started catching on."
(August 1, 2004)