Iraq War Launched To Protect Israel- Bush Advisor

From Inter Press Service and Today's Common Dreams

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0329-11.htm

Philip Zelikow, Executive Director of the 9/11 commission
is involved.

Thats crazy.

Any confirmation from other news agencies?

.

The following is from a Guardian story about Rummy's own private intelligence agency, the Office of Special Plans whose main function seemed to be to cobble together whatever intelligence they could get that lent any support to the notion that Saddam might have WMD and "stovepipe" it it into the White House without subjecting it to the normal process of analysis for reliability and verification etc.


The Spies Who Pushed For War.
<snip>

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.

"None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms.

The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party.

In 1996, he and Richard Perle - now an influential Pentagon figure - served as advisers to the then Likud leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. In a policy paper they wrote, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the two advisers said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would have to be overthrown or destabilised, for Israel to be truly safe.

<snip>
www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html

This place is a gold mine for information

The spies who pushed for war
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=18394

It may have been a component in their rationale but it is not THE reason they invaded Iraq.

Philip needs a good spanking. Bad boy Philip.

Are you claiming they are more loyal to Israel than the U.S.?

If you can't see it, well, sorry.

So why not say what you are thinking.

I would surmise (and, of course, everything I or anyone else ever conclude without due process is merely surmise) that they offer no loyalty to anything other than their obsessive need to have control over everything to prevent their irrational fear from ever evolving. Only, all that is f*cked up because (1) their fear is irrational; and (2) they cannot control everything.

The article says that it was "a prime motive" was to protect Israel, whereas the headline makes it sound like the only issue.

This is a handy technique people use to prey upon peoples' simplistic thinking: make it all sound one cause, then the whole argument of any influence can be dismissed.

This is, again, the third rail of American Foreign Policy: Israel is good, no matter what it does, and any argument against its actions or actions to protect it are evil.

At the heart of the matter, it's the problem with religion: strong believers are more beholden to their religion than their country. Although the PNAC boys (the non-gentiles, of whom there ARE a few) want the American world domination that the organization's title suggests, their loyalties are so strongly for Israel that they'd actively hurt the U.S. to guarantee it.

In that sense, yes, they are more loyal to Israel than the U.S.

all unauthorized and investigated. Feith was actually fired for it.

Michael Ledeen, consultant to Office of Special Plans, was an unregistered foreign agent to Israel.

Counterpunch had an interesting article on it by Stephen Green in January but it's not online; however, I did find this version of it: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5788.htm

and this has similar info: http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/04/64104.html

...will buy it because it dovetails very nicely with everything else that we currently know about the NeoCons adventurism in the Middle East.

There was a short list of reasons besides the protection of Israel - all interwoven....

Politcal pull
Euro-Dollar threat
Military base move from SA,
Corporate rake-off
Revenge -

I don't remember them all precisely.

WHAT WE DIDN"T KNOW was what came out about Rumnut.
Because the target was easier

(translation = we would hit on a weakened nation and easy target - and make a pile along the way and our humvees could roll along on flat land and there was a little water access for the oil docks and it was closer to the refineries and docks in the old USSR countries and could be tied to the Georgia wells and lines).

THE PROTECTION OF ISRAEL is why PNAC wants to go for Syria and Iran, also. Vote for Bush and you will probably get Syria and Iran if the same Dem Senators and Congresspeople are voting to support Bush.

So he could look like "Commander in chief".
Its all part of Rove's plans for Bush* running for the 2nd term.

so what's new

I'm sorry that I don't have a link. I heard from journalists in 2001 and 2002 that the Israelis were encouraging * to go to war with Iraq.

I agree that Israeli pressure would not have been enough for * - it would have been just one more good reason.

Zelikow has no business chairing the 9/11 Commission. It is a huge and blatant conflict of interest. It's disgraceful that * put him in that position and disgraceful of him to have accepted, imo.

http://www.nowarforisrael.com/

This one seemed of interest
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=1368
Zionist Richard Perle : 'Inspections Or Not, We'll Attack Iraq'

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12377231&method=full&siteid=50143


WAR, WHATEVER

Bush aide: Inspections or not, we'll attack Iraq
Exclusive By Paul Gilfeather, Whitehall Editor

GEORGE Bush's top security adviser last night admitted the US would attack
Iraq even if UN inspectors fail to find weapons.

Dr Richard Perle stunned MPs by insisting a "clean bill of health" from UN
chief weapons inspector Hans Blix would not halt America's war machine.

Evidence from ONE witness on Saddam Hussein's weapons programme will be
enough to trigger a fresh military onslaught, he told an all- party meeting
on global security.

Former defence minister and Labour backbencher Peter Kilfoyle said: "America
is duping the world into believing it supports these inspections. President
Bush intends to go to war even if inspectors find nothing.

"This make a mockery of the whole process and exposes America's real
determination to bomb Iraq."
(snip)

even taking into consideration Bush's claim that a god is telling him what to do. He did make that assertion , after all. Christians who believe in the rapture and the second coming and prophecies are anxious that Israel be preserved, intact because it will be the focus and site of the prophetic, biblical Armageddon

as good a theory as any :shrug:

Israel is an anchor toward dominence in the ME. That is why the US courts Israel as a valuable ally--for it's strategic location amidst the lucrative oil fields there.

The 9-11 families are right to call for the resignation of Zelikow. He is intimately connected to Rice and to Bush and his administration. It cannot be consdidered to be apolitical or non partisan with him at the helm--all information first must be passed through him for approval. He has control over the content. Crazy and apparently acceptable--country is very broken

Sure, that's why most of the neocons were into doing it, and it was a happy fantasy that the White House let them have and share.

Why Bush, Cheney, and Powell really did it has nothing to do with reality or Israel and everything to do with egos, pride, greed, vaingloriousness, and 1990/91.

Somehow Israel just had to be blamed for this. Dang if they just were not so rough on the PA activists.

http://www.peacenow.org/nia/leg/10172003.html

On October 15th the Senate took up a slightly modified version of the amendment proposed by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to the Iraq supplemental (SA 1806 to S. 1689 - see the October 3rd edition of the Round-Up for details of the original amendment). The amendment marks the first time Congress has formally linked the U.S. military effort in Iraq to Israel.

In its final form adopted by the Senate by a vote of 95 in favor, two opposed , the amendment adds a Sense of Congress to the bill stipulating that "the removal of the Government of Saddam Hussein has enhanced the security of Israel and other United States allies." The amendment is as follows:

Sec. 3002

(a) Congress finds that--
(1) Israel is a strategic ally of the United States in the Middle East;
(2) Israel recognizes the benefits of a democratic form of government;
(3) the policies and activities of the Government of Iraq under the Saddam Hussein regime contributed to security concerns in the Middle East, especially for Israel;
(4) the Arab Liberation Front was established by Iraqi Baathists, and supported by Saddam Hussein;
(5) the Government of Iraq under the Saddam Hussein regime assisted the Arab Liberation Front in distributing grants to the families of suicide bombers;
(6) the Government of Iraq under the Saddam Hussein regime aided Abu Abass (sic), leader of the Palestinian Liberation Front, who was a mastermind of the hijacking of the Achille Lauro, an Italian cruise ship, and is responsible for the death of an American tourist aboard that ship; and
(7) Saddam Hussein attacked Israel during the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf War by launching 39 Scud missiles into that country and thereby causing multiple casualties.
(b) It is the sense of Congress that the removal of the Government of Iraq under Saddam Hussein enhanced the security of Israel and other United States allies.

tiptoed around.
add to that the Armegeddon Lobby.
http://www.againstbombing.com/ArmageddonUpdates.htm
its falling apart. Sharon might be indicted, Europeans vowing to get rid of Bush, the train attack In Spain, the elections in France and Spain going to the left.
The mafia of these war criminals is falling apart.

I'd rather we do it ourselves via election, but if that fails. . .

something about "any port in a storm?"

"a 'bonus' the U.S. could give to Israel in return for its unequivocal support for the American-led campaign in Iraq," according to US Checking Possibility of Pumping Oil from Northern Iraq to Haifa, via Jordan in CommonDreams for August 25, 2003.

Even earlier, in April, Christian Science Monitor reported An old Israel-Iraq oil line ... reopening?:
ATHENS – Nothing could be better designed to undermine the coalition's promise that Iraq's oil should benefit its own people than Israel's proclaimed wish to "reopen" a long-unused pipeline from Iraq's Kirkuk oil fields to Israel's Mediterranean port of Haifa. ...

plenty more in a google search of http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=oil+pipeline+Israel">oil pipeline Israel

providing oil "independence" would help also help Israel's security, no?

that oil pipeline directly to Israel from Iraq - It was all about oil, power, control, and greed for money. Democracy, is just a front as is junior.

Philip Zelikow is either 100% stupid or he runs with the gutter rats that are getting picked apart.

matter? The neo-cons want Israel on our side no matter what... whether it's Sharon or not.

of course, that is, if the NEWS of it ever REACHES the US public.
Im starting to realize that the corporate media is our worst enemy right now and always has been from the start.
They want to sell products. I dont think they get it. The Daily Show beats them all in ratings. I announce today that when the indictments start against Bush the media will pounce all over him like maggots on a pile of dog dung. They are still holding up the emporer , but they cant do it forever, as the truth spills out.
I warn them all the time, they will go down in History as the worst journalism ever, and as the biggest whores ever if they dont start telling the truth and doing some real journalism.
Oh well, at least SOME journalists are good.
In the meantime, DU has the best expertise and journalistic integrity of anyone I read. I go straight to Breaking News here for my coverage of the world.
Thank God for the Internet.

at her neighbors.

if they can have a troublesome neighbor taken care of, get access to some high quality crude at the same time without having to use their nukes (fallout will screw Israel big time as well) and get the US to expend the blood and treasure why not?

"A Clean Break" Richard Perle?

was more for Israel's security than ours, then they haven't read "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm". Keep in mind these this document was written for Benjamin Netanyahu?s government. Now tell me again, that Richard Perle doesn't work for the Israeli government?


http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm



Participants in the Study Group on "A New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000:"

Richard Perle, American Enterprise Institute, Study Group Leader

James Colbert, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs
Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Johns Hopkins University/SAIS
Douglas Feith, Feith and Zell Associates
Robert Loewenberg, President, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Jonathan Torop, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
David Wurmser, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies
Meyrav Wurmser, Johns Hopkins University

:eyes:

:kick:

Just got back from a book pushing seminar with fmr Weapons inspector Hans Blix at the Swedish Institute of Foreign Affairs www.ui.se and the same idea was raised during the seminar by our fmr UN ambassador Sverker Åström.

He was of the opinion (and asked Blix for his) that the war in Iraq was in line with a hawkish US policy in place since 2000 which in short aims to "reshuffle" the middle east in order to promote democracy and secure Israel. Nothing that the UN did during the period leading up to the war could possibly stop the subsequent US intervention.

Blix replied that he had heard of these policies being promoted by some within the belt way (whatever that means).

Some other interesting points that was raised:

- Wolfowitz "bureaucratic" reasons for invading Iraq beside the main WMD argument such as peace in the middle east, US troop presence in the area replacing S. Arabia, HR and democracy (though questionable if the US respected Turkey in the build up).

- Blix views on the visible results (yet) of the war; (+)the removal of SH,
(- & +) Libya joining the int. community again. On this subject Blix was very cautious and warned against to much optimism as Khadaffi earlier has demonstrated irate behaviour. He denied that the US intervention was solely responsible for the result, many years of diplomacy lies behind the progress but he admitted that the war could have been the drop...
(-) the danger of terrorists and terror has not decreased as a result of the war, democracy so far has not strengthened in the region, the position of the UN security council and the US administration has been undermined.

- Steep learning curve of the administration? Have they learned anything at all? Blix suggested there could have been a sense of Hubris after the Afghanistan war. Maybe the administration really expected the Iraqi people to welcome the alliance forces with cheers. Hopefully they have learned their lesson not least concerning the alliance of the willing, which seems to be less willing as time goes on.

And thanks for the warning before 911!!!!

The War Behind Closed Doors

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/

Truth War and Consequences

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/

Right now it's the TOP reader-rated story. :-)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&e=1&u=/oneworld/4536827661080666584

Thanks!

We can't let this argument be about Israel and whether we should protect an ally, but about Bush lying about the reasons for the war.