Shocker: Kristol Preparing Ground For War With Iran
Shocker: Kristol Preparing Ground For War With Iran
Discussing President Obama’s Iran policy on Fox News this morning, Bill Kristol gave the neoconservative’s answer to every foreign policy problem: military force.
Scoffing at President Obama’s continued offers of engagement, Kristol claimed that the only way to deal with Iran was to threaten war. “I wouldn’t be surprised if the Iranians do a phony feint toward negotiations to try and buy some more time,” Kristol said. “That’s what they’re buying, they’re buying time for their nuclear program to go ahead, it has been going ahead.” Kristol then prepared the ground for what he hopes is America’s next war:
KRISTOL: I think the reason the president doesn’t want to talk about the real implications of having a delusional and hateful Iranian regime in power is that the real implications is if sanctions fail, we will have to use force. And not certain that the president doesn’t actually know that. I’m open to the notion that he will end up a year from now using force against Iran, and I guess he feels there’s no point signaling that now.
I think it’s a mistake, because I think the more you put force on the table, the more you might encourage those within Iran to say ‘wait a second we’re heading towards the precipice.’ That’s not his style, he keeps to door open to negotiations, but I’ve got to say that if you look at the way this is playing out, it’s playing out toward use of force against Iran.
Watch it:
In regard to the utility of threats of force against Iran, the actual evidence is, unsurprisingly, precisely the opposite of what Kristol says. President George W. Bush regularly threatened Iran, but rather than strengthening moderate voices, as Kristol imagines it would, this actually strengthened those elements who believe, like Kristol himself, that moderation signals weakness. As journalist Barbara Slavin wrote in 2007, Bush’s belligerent rhetoric had the effect of “boosting Iranian hardliners who argue that the Bush administration has no interest in reconciling with Iran and that Tehran’s best course is to reach bomb capacity as soon as possible.”
Iranian dissident Akbar Ganji was adamant in a May 2010 interview that talk of a U.S. military option was harmful. “If you do not have the threat of foreign invasion and you do not use the dialog of invasion and military intervention, the society itself has a huge potential to oppose and potentially topple the theocratic system,” Ganji said, adding:
What I’m trying to get to is that jingoistic, militaristic language used by any foreign power would actually be detrimental to this natural evolution of Iranian society.
“Unfortunately, the policies of the United States have fanned the flames of Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East, particularly during the Bush administration,” Ganji said. “The belligerent rhetoric of Bush didn’t help us [the Iranian democracy movement], it actually harmed us.”
On the other hand, Ganji praised President Obama’s engagement policy, stating that it helped create a favorable environment for the Iranian democracy movement. “Obama offered a dialog with the Iran,” Ganji said, “and this change in discourse immediately gave rise to that outpouring of sentiment against the Islamic Republic last year.” Unlike Bush’s threats of war, which only served to unite the regime against an outside threat, Obama’s engagement policy, combined with increasing sanctions pressure, has, by offering the regime a genuine choice, contributed to the worst crisis of legitimacy in the Islamic Republic’s history.
Ganji also noted, however, that continuing fear of U.S. action had caused democracy activists to censor themselves. “Since Iranians, in particular opposition groups, do not want to see a repeat of Afghanistan or Iraq in Iran,” Ganji said, “they’ve actually had to scale back their opposition to the government in order not to encourage an invasion.”
In his mania to embroil America in yet another disastrous war, Kristol will no doubt simply dismiss these views, just as he dismissed Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen’s warning against U.S. strikes on Iran as “silly.” But given Kristol’s record of being wrong on most of the key foreign policy questions of our era, it’s clear whose views should actually be dismissed.
- Comments
- 305
Media’s Handling Of Marty Peretz Versus Helen Thomas Highlights Double Standard
Media’s Handling Of Marty Peretz Versus Helen Thomas Highlights Double Standard
Over the past weeks, Marty Peretz, the editor in chief of The New Republic, has been criticized for a number of offensive statements about Muslims, including a claim that “Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims.” I penned an op-ed in today’s Boston Globe comparing the Peretz affair to the way reporter Helen Thomas was treated after making an offensive remark about Jews and Israel. Noting that Peretz has engaged in this sort of language against Muslims and Arabs for decades, I point out that Peretz “continues to receive a special dispensation for these libels, while Thomas received public condemnation and a pink slip for her single denial of Jewish national claims”:
Condemning Thomas’s remarks, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote that they were “rooted in the same grotesque motivation’’ as Holocaust denial: “To deny to Jews the truth of their own history.’’
This is, of course, precisely what Peretz attempted to do to the Palestinians for years, yet Goldberg has, to date, issued no similar condemnation.
By upholding a double standard for these slanders, or simply ignoring them, too many journalists have effectively abetted them.
Read it here.
How Many Muslims Contributed To New Right-Wing ‘Team B’ Report On Islamic Sharia Law? None
How Many Muslims Contributed To New Right-Wing ‘Team B’ Report On Islamic Sharia Law? None
The Washington Times’ Bill Gertz reports that “A panel of national security experts who worked under Republican and Democratic presidents is urging the Obama administration to abandon its stance that Islam is not linked to terrorism, arguing that radical Muslims are using Islamic law to subvert the United States.” The report, titled Sharia: The Threat To America, was released today by the Center for Security Policy, a think tank led by Washington Times columnist and noted conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney.
At an event earlier today on Capitol Hill, retired Lt. Gen. Soyster introduced the report by admitting, “I’m here out of ignorance. Three years ago I realized how little I knew about Islam.” Soyster said he “went to some classes,” and “the more I learned, the worse it got.”
Noting some of the report’s broad and controversial claims about Islamic law, such as that all devout Muslims are duty-bound to wage jihad against unbelievers, ThinkProgress asked Gaffney how many actual Muslims or Islamic scholars he and his group had consulted with in writing the report. He could not name any, though he noted that he had consulted with various Muslims “over the years.”
So there you have it. A report on the threat posed by Islamic law to the United States, one of whose leaders admits to having started studying Islam only three years ago, whose authors admit consulting with no actual Muslims, produced by a think tank that has previously claimed that key members of the Obama administration are part of the Iran Lobby.
GOP House Candidate Pantano Claims Rauf, Iran Behind Gaza Flotilla
GOP House Candidate Pantano Claims Rauf, Iran Behind Gaza Flotilla
Speaking yesterday at Stop Islamization of America’s rally at Ground Zero against the Park 51 Islamic cultural center, North Carolina GOP congressional candidate Ilario Pantano attempted to turn the event into an anti-Iran rally. Pantano also spun a bizarre conspiracy theory in which Imam Abdul Feisal Rauf, the leader of the Park 51 group, was in league with Iran to support the Gaza flotilla in late May that resulted in the killing of nine Turks — including one Turkish American — by Israeli commandos.
“Let’s take a moment to take a look at the person that wants to bring it [the Islamic center] here,” Pantano said, referring to Rauf. “Does anyone find it interesting that he’s also involved in the Free Gaza flotilla movement that had a made-for-TV action with Israel just as all of this was developing?”
PANTANO: But there was something else that happened. Because, and I want to stretch your imagination for a second, but every time Iran is about to face a nuclear sanction, from the EU or the UN, what happens? Something flares up with Israel! I wonder how that happens? I wonder in 2006 when Iran was about to face nuclear sanctions for their nuclear weapons program — yes folks, we want to give radical extremists nuclear weapons, it’s unconscionable to me — but remember back to 2006, a fight in Lebanon with the Israelis. Who provoked that? Iran! Iran! Think back to 2008, again, Iran about to face sanctions, who provoked attacks from Gaza, missile attacks on Israel? Iran. And radical Islam. That’s exactly right.
Ladies and gentlemen, in 2010 as Iran faced its toughest round of sanctions, we have the made-for-TV episode, with Israel rightfully trying to protect itself by maintaining a blockade to make sure murderous rockets don’t kill its innocent citizens, where did that come from? Imam Rauf is a member of the organization that has been behind all of that. We know that Iran has been complicit in all of that. I want to know where the money for this mosque is coming from!
Watch it:
Pantano’s rant was neatly emblematic of the entire event, stirring together half-truths with outright falsehoods into a stew of anti-Muslim paranoia. His claim that Imam Rauf is a member of the organization behind the Free Gaza movement is probably a reference to the Malaysian-based Perdana Global Peace Organization, a major donor to the flotilla campaign. Like much of the misinformation floating around about the Park 51 project, this claim originated with the New York Post. But a Cordoba Initiative FAQ page notes that Imam Rauf “has never been a member of this group,” explaining that “several years ago, Imam Feisal was invited to Malaysia, the most moderate Islamic country in the world, to participate in a Peace Conference sponsored by the Perdana Peace Group. He was one of the hundreds of speakers present.”
The idea that Iran was “complicit,” along with Rauf, in the Gaza flotilla is a strange new element, one that hasn’t been claimed elsewhere, let alone proven. And while it’s clear that Iran maintains supportive relationships with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, it’s simply false to present the aims and actions of the groups as identical to those of Iran, or to suggest that they have anything to do with Imam Rauf. Unless, of course, your purpose is to gin up paranoia and hatred against an Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan.
Petraeus: Quran Burning ‘Could Endanger Troops’
Petraeus: Quran Burning ‘Could Endanger Troops’
On September 11, 2010, the extremist evangelical Dove World Church — whose pastor, Terry Jones, has written a book called “Islam Is Of The Devil” — plans to host “International Burn a Quran Day,” when it will burn Islam’s sacred text and encourage others across the world to do so as well. Church member Wayne Sapp has even posted an instructional video that explains how and why to burn the Quran.
But today the Wall Street Journal reports that Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said the planned burning of Qurans “could put the lives of American troops in danger and damage the war effort“:
Petraeus said the Taliban would exploit the demonstration for propaganda purposes, drumming up anger toward the U.S. and making it harder for allied troops to carry out their mission of protecting Afghan civilians.
“It could endanger troops and it could endanger the overall effort,” Gen. Petraeus said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. “It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here [in Afghanistan], but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.”
"We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decision of the president and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18-year-old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
Chris Wallace: Obama’s ‘Heart Isn’t Really Into Winning The War On Terror’
Chris Wallace: Obama’s ‘Heart Isn’t Really Into Winning The War On Terror’
Discussing President Obama’s Tuesday Iraq speech on Fox News Sunday’s morning panel, “fair and balanced” moderator Chris Wallace cited Obama’s discussion of the economy in order to ask the panelists, “Is it unfair to say that this a president whose heart doesn’t seem to be into winning the war on terror”:
WALLACE: In that speech, to say “my central mission is to restore the economy,” is it unfair to say that this a president whose heart doesn’t seem to be into winning the war on terror, no matter what it costs?
STEPHEN HAYES, WEEKLY STANDARD: No, I don’t think that’s at all unfair, and the reason you can say that is if you look back at his inaugural address, the key paragraph is the paragraph in which he describes what he called “the crisis now well understood.” In that paragraph he mentions, in one sentence, the war on terror, and then he goes on and gives a litany of economic, domestic policy problems. He talks about schools, he talks about health care, he talks about job losses, he talks about homes. This is how the president thinks, so to a certain extent there’s no question that this is driven by polls, by the potential that people are perceiving him as focused on Afghanistan or he’s talking too much about other things, not the economy. He wanted to talk about the economy. But more fundamentally, this is how the president thinks, for better or worse.
Watch it:
Even leaving aside why anyone should treat a discredited Saddam-Al Qaeda conspiracy theorist like Hayes as credible on anything, this is pretty pathetic. Hayes cites a stage-setting passage from the top of Obama’s inaugural address in order to argue that Obama doesn’t care about national security, ignoring that Obama later spent five full paragraphs of that speech solely on national security.
While it’s true that Obama has a number of challenges on his plate, many resulting from the staggering incompetence of his predecessor, there’s simply no reality-based argument that President Obama hasn’t been completely engaged on national security. In contrast to the Bush administration, which needlessly and disastrously conflated and confused who the real threat was, since taking office, Obama has relentlessly focused on al Qaeda and significantly intensified U.S. efforts to find, frustrate and destroy al Qaeda’s terrorist infrastructure. But for Fox News, nothing will ever be enough.
The larger issue, however, is Obama’s correct understanding of the importance of the relationship between America’s domestic economic security and our national security. What conservatives like Hayes and Wallace apparently don’t get is that without a strong economy, America’s ability to project power and achieve its international goals is seriously diminished. America’s economic health isn’t peripheral to America’s national security, it’s central to it.
In 2008, Sarah Palin Had No Idea Who Her ‘Political Heroine’ Margaret Thatcher Was
In 2008, Sarah Palin Had No Idea Who Her ‘Political Heroine’ Margaret Thatcher Was
A new Vanity Fair profile reveals some new information about former half-term Alaska governor Sarah Palin. Like this:
Early in the 2008 campaign, when John McCain’s aides discovered that Alaska-size gaps existed in Palin’s general knowledge (among those previously unreported: she had no idea who Margaret Thatcher was), they from time to time would give her some books to read in hopes of improving the candidate’s learning curve.
This is interesting, as Palin wrote on her Facebook page in June 2010:
I have received an invitation for a visit to London, and part of that invitation included the offer of arranging a meeting between myself and one of my political heroines, the “Iron Lady,” Margaret Thatcher. I would love to meet her and hope I’ll be able to arrange the trip in the future.
As I wrote last year when I offered her birthday wishes, Baroness Thatcher’s life and career serve as a blueprint for overcoming the odds and challenging the ’status quo.’ She started life as a grocer’s daughter from Grantham and rose to become Prime Minister — all by her own merit and hard work. I cherish her example and will always count her as one of my role models. Her friendship with my other political hero, Ronald Reagan, exemplified the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.
Perhaps Palin subsequently learned who Thatcher was from one of the books the McCain campaign gave her to read. Or perhaps the latest post was a bit of artistic license by Rebecca Mansour, the 36-year-old former screenwriter who Vanity Fair reports was hired in 2009 to ghostwrite Palin’s Facebook page.
At Ground Zero anti-Islam rally, man harassed for looking vaguely Muslim.
At Ground Zero anti-Islam rally, man harassed for looking vaguely Muslim.
At an anti-Islam rally yesterday at Ground Zero, a person of color wearing a skull cap and wandering through the crowd was targeted with insults and nearly attacked by protesters for the offense of looking vaguely Muslim. The videographer summarized the episode this way:
A man walks through the crowd at the Ground Zero protest and is mistaken as a Muslim. The crowd turns on him and confronts him. The man in the blue hard hat calls him a coward and tries to fight him. The tall man who I think was one of the organizers tried to get between the two men. Later I caught up with the man who’s name is Kenny. He is a Union carpenter who works at Ground Zero. We discussed what a scary moment that was for him.
Glenn Greenwald observes that the video “shows some extremely ugly stuff that’s been unleashed.” Watch it:
Interesting way to “honor” Ground Zero, no?
Gingrich Backs Out Of 9/11 Anti-Islam Rally?
Gingrich Backs Out Of 9/11 Anti-Islam Rally?
On Sunday, ThinkProgress reported that the right-wing group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) had announced that it would be hosting a rally against the proposed Cordoba House Islamic community center on September 11, and that its confirmed list of speakers included both disgraced former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and far-right Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders.
Writing on her blog yesterday, anti-Islam activist Pamela Geller, one of the leaders of SIOA, confirmed that “Newt Gingrich, and Geert Wilders are among those speaking at our rally against the mega-mosque on 9/11.” Geller also referenced Gingrich’s participation in an earlier post.
Today, however, a spokesman for Gingrich, Joe DeSantis, told Politico’s Ben Smith that Gingrich “is not scheduled to be at this rally. He is not speaking.”
Was there a scheduling conflict? Given his rhetoric lately, it’s hard to believe Gingrich is experiencing a sudden onset of decency.
Bolton calls for Israel to strike Iran in the next eight days.
Bolton calls for Israel to strike Iran in the next eight days.
Russia has announced that it will introduce fuel rods into Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor on August 21, which both Russia and Iran say is purely for civilian use. Appearing on Fox Business channel yesterday to comment on Russia’s move, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton told anchor David Asman, “If Israel’s going to do anything against Bushehr, it has to move in the next eight days.” “The point is that we can’t — we or Israel or whomever — can’t bomb these plants, this nuclear reactor,” Asman observed, “because it would send radiation flying in the air, it would affect thousands of people, Iranians.” Bolton reasoned that an Israeli strike must therefore happen immediately:
BOLTON: Well, unless the Israelis move within the next eight days. Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they’re in the reactor as you say, attacking it means a release of radiation, no question about it. So if Israel’s going to do anything against Bushehr it has to move in the next eight days. If they don’t, then as I say something Saddam Hussein wanted but couldn’t get, a functioning nuclear reactor — because the Israelis bombed it in 1981 — something that Bashar al-Assad in Syria wanted, a functioning nuclear reactor — until the Israelis bombed it — couldn’t get, the Iranians, sworn enemies of Israel, will have.
ASMAN: Boy, we’ve literally run out of time, but within the next eight days, do you think it’s likely that within the next eight days the Israelis will strike?
BOLTON: I don’t think so, I’m afraid that they’ve lost this opportunity.
Watch it:
So, according to John Bolton, after August 21 there will be no point in striking Iran. Good to know.
Gingrich, Bolton, Breitbart Team Up With Far-Right Muslim-Basher Geert Wilders For 9/11 Rally
Gingrich, Bolton, Breitbart Team Up With Far-Right Muslim-Basher Geert Wilders For 9/11 Rally
The right-wing group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) has announced that it will be hosting a rally against the proposed Cordoba House Islamic community center on September 11.
The confirmed list of speakers includes former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Andrew Breitbart, and, notably, the far-right Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders. “Islam is not a religion, it’s an ideology,” Wilders told the Guardian in 2009, “the ideology of a retarded culture.”
In the past, Wilders’ extremism has been condemned by conservatives such as Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and even Glenn Beck, who called Wilders “fascist.” It’s a clear sign of how far the Republicans have shifted to the right and embraced Islamophobia as a political tool that movement figures like Gingrich, Bolton, and Breitbart now have no problem sharing a stage with Wilders.
CNN Contributor Erickson Compares Building of Mosque To ‘Human Sacrifice’
CNN Contributor Erickson Compares Building of Mosque To ‘Human Sacrifice’
Reacting angrily to President Obama’s statement yesterday in support of the Cordoba House community center in lower Manhattan on the basis of religious freedom, blogger and CNN contributor Erick Erickson compared supporting the rights of Muslims to establish mosques in America to supporting “human sacrifice” by the Church of Satan. Erickson went on to suggest that the president’s interpretation of American religious freedom could also extend to support for “jihad”.
As the Guardian’s Michael Tomasky notes, the president’s support for the Cordoba House “is going to be demagogued to death in the next few days. The important part is going forward. Hang tough. Stand by the position. Don’t trim sails or add asterisks after Mitch McConnell or Dick Cheney or whomever says whatever hideous thing they’re going to say.”
By supporting the rights of an unpopular religious minority, President Obama is firmly within the bounds of America’s best traditions and values. The same can’t be said of those cultivating fear of Muslims for political gain.
Bush mockingly referred to Kristol and Krauthammer as ‘the bomber boys.’
Bush mockingly referred to Kristol and Krauthammer as ‘the bomber boys.’
In a new article on the possibility of an Israeli military strike on Iran, the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg reports that, when in office, “even Bush balked at attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, and discouraged the Israelis from carrying out the attack on their own.” Goldberg also reports Bush’s attitude toward those anxious for the U.S. to get into yet another war in the Middle East:
Bush would sometimes mock those aides and commentators who advocated an attack on Iran, even referring to the conservative columnists Charles Krauthammer and William Kristol as “the bomber boys,” according to two people I spoke with who overheard this.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney has admitted that he was in favor of a U.S. attack on Iran, but was vetoed by President Bush. This is the first indication we’ve seen, however, that Bush thought that Kristol and Krauthammer are as crazy as the rest of us do.
Opponent Of Cordoba House Is Building A Museum On Top Of A Muslim Cemetery In Jerusalem
Opponent Of Cordoba House Is Building A Museum On Top Of A Muslim Cemetery In Jerusalem
Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center appeared on Fox News yesterday to argue against the Cordoba House project in lower Manhattan. “It’s a great idea, it’s the wrong location,” Hier said. “It’s very insensitive.”
HIER: For 3000 families, the 9/11 site is one of the — is the site of one of the greatest atrocities ever committed in the United States, and it’s a cemetery. And the opinion of the families should be paramount as to what should go near that site. Now having a fifteen-story mosque within 1600 feet of the site is at the very least insensitive.
Watch it:
Interestingly, while Hier believes that Ground Zero should be treated as a cemetery, Hier’s own organization is currently building a “Museum of Tolerance” atop an actual cemetery — the Mamilla Cemetery, a Muslim graveyard in Jerusalem “with thousands of grave sites that go back some 1200 years.” The planned museum has caused a huge international uproar, causing celebrity architect Frank Gehry to withdraw from the project.
In February 2010, the Center for Constitutional Rights and other groups filed a petition on behalf of the Palestinian descendants of those buried in the Mamilla Cemetery. The petition claimed:
A significant portion of the cemetery is being destroyed and hundreds of human remains are being desecrated so that SWC can build a facility to be called the “Center for Human Dignity – Museum of Tolerance” on this sacred Muslim site.
Great idea. Wrong location.
Flashback: George Washington in 1790 — The U.S. government ‘gives to bigotry no sanction.’
Flashback: George Washington in 1790 — The U.S. government ‘gives to bigotry no sanction.’
In 1790, President George Washington wrote a letter to the Jewish community of Newport, Rhode Island, affirming the values of tolerance and religious freedom that he saw as the bedrock of the country that he had had helped found, and done so much to secure. “The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for giving to Mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy,” Washington wrote, “a policy worthy of imitation.” He continued:
All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens. [...]
May the Children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.
The debate over the Ground Zero Mosque is, in fact, a debate over American values. Newt Gingrich has been trying to claim that the construction of the mosque is “explicitly at odds with core American and Western values,” while Mayor Bloomberg correctly noted yesterday that “we would betray our values if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else.” If the conservatives who have been attacking the mosque think that George Washington was wrong about American tolerance and religious freedom, let them say so explicitly.
Pipes: To Get Obama To Act, Netanyahu Should Threaten To Nuke Iran
Pipes: To Get Obama To Act, Netanyahu Should Threaten To Nuke Iran
In a recent interview with the right-wing Christian Zionist Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, neoconservative pundit Daniel Pipes shared his view that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should threaten to use nuclear weapons against Iran as a means of “applying pressure” on the United States.
“I think it’s realistic for the Israelis to attack and do real damage,” Pipes said. “Now, what constitutes success, I’m not exactly sure. There are many, many questions“:
PIPES: If I were [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, I would say to [U.S. President Barack] Obama, “Why don’t you take out the Iranian nukes? Or else we will And we will not do it by trying to fly planes across Turkey and Syria or Jordan or Saudi Arabia. We will do it from submarine-based, tactical nuclear weapons. You don’t want that; we don’t want that; but that’s the way we can do this job for sure. You do it your way so we don’t have to escalate to that.” That would be a way of applying pressure. There are so many details which I’m not privy to. But that would be my kind of approach if I were the Israelis.
Neoconservatives have long desired a war with Iran, even though U.S. officials like Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen have stated that such a war would have disastrous consequences for U.S. troops and interests in the region.
Ignoring these views, the neocons have recently begun to openly exhort Israel to attack Iran as a means of spurring American action. Pipes’ suggestion that Israel should threaten to nuke Iran represents a significant escalation in their rhetoric.
‘Emergency Committee for Israel’ Based Out Of ‘Committee for the Liberation of Iraq’ Offices
‘Emergency Committee for Israel’ Based Out Of ‘Committee for the Liberation of Iraq’ Offices
In a nice catch, Eli Clifton reports that the Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI), the latest neocon astroturf pro-war outfit, is based out of the same office as a previous neocon astroturf pro-war outfit, the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI):
The evidence lies in a a letter from ECI’s executive director (pdf), Noah Pollak, to Comcast regarding the attack ad the group has been running in Pennsylvania. The letterhead bears the following address: “918 Pennsylvania Ave., SE · Washington, D.C. 20003.”
That address happens to be the same as that of Orion Strategies, a public-relations consultancy owned and operated by renowned GOP lobbyist Randy Scheunemann, who, in addition to serving as president of the CLI, has been retained since the 2008 elections as Sarah Palin’s personal — and Bill Kristol-approved — foreign-policy trainer.
The connection to Orion Strategies comes through former Weekly Standard web editor and regrettable McCain campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb, who joined Scheunemann’s firm last January, and serves as an adviser to the Emergency Committee for Israel. In addition to his work with ECI, Goldfarb also advises the Liz Cheney/Bill Kristol-led Keep America Safe, and was a research associate at the Project for the New American Century, which served as the mothership for various neocon enterprises in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, most notably the invasion of Iraq.
In addition to serving as president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, Scheunemann served as PNAC’s director, and was a key ally of Iran-connected con-man Ahmad Chalabi.
Considering how disastrous the Iraq invasion was, not only for U.S. security but also for Israel’s — driving radicalism and sectarianism in the region, vastly increasing Iranian influence in the region and allowing it to advance its nuclear program — it is deeply ironic that the people operating the “Emergency Committee for Israel” are among those most responsible for creating that “emergency” in the first place.
New Neocon Israeli Propaganda Outfit Run By Opponent of Two State Solution
New Neocon Israeli Propaganda Outfit Run By Opponent of Two State Solution
Picking up on Eli Clifton’s reporting, Ben Smith tells us a little more about the Emergency Committee for Israel, neocon svengali Bill Kristol’s latest astroturf anti-Obama effort:
The Emergency Committee for Israel’s leadership unites two major strands of support for the Jewish state: The hawkish, neoconservative wing of the Republican Party, many of whom are Jewish, and conservative Evangelical Christians who have become increasingly outspoken in their support for Israel. The new group’s board includes Weekly Standard Editor William Kristol and Gary Bauer, the former Republican presidential candidate who leads the group American Values.
Just so we know where this group is really coming from, Gary Bauer opposes the creation of a Palestinian state. Here’s what Bauer said in a speech several years ago:
God granted the Land of Israel to the Jewish people and there is an absolute ban on giving it away to another people.
Support for the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza — which Bauer regards as unacceptably “dividing” the Land of Israel — became official U.S. policy under President George W. Bush. President Obama made it clear at the beginning of his presidency that he considered the creation of a Palestinian state and the resolution of the conflict to be in both the U.S. and Israeli national security interests. In his written testimony to Congress in March (pdf), Gen. David Petraeus affirmed this view, stating that “Insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace” is among the “root causes of instability [and] obstacles to security” in the region, and that progress on Middle East peace was imperative to achieving U.S. goals.
Gary Bauer has a different view, and thinks Middle East peacemaking is a waste of time. In addition to being far out of the American foreign policy/national security mainstream, Bauer’s position as actually to the right even of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who accepted a Palestinian state in his June 2009 Bar Ilan speech.
ThinkProgress contacted Bauer to see if it was still his position that the creation of a Palestinian state was a violation of The Lord’s “absolute ban” against dividing the land. Bauer’s press representative Kristi Hamrick said that Mr. Bauer “declines the opportunity to comment” on this. Politico’s Ben Smith reports that Michael Goldfarb, an adviser to the Emergency Committee, told him that the group doesn’t have a position on the creation of a Palestinian state.
Fox News Rebuts Israeli Talking Point
Fox News Rebuts Israeli Talking Point
Here’s a report on systemic discrimination against Palestinians buying land in Jerusalem from a surprising source — Fox News:
Despite claims from the Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat, and the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, that Jerusalem’s real estate market is free and open to anyone regardless of race or religion, a new study shows Palestinians do not have equal access to property in Jerusalem.
The Israel group Ir Amim released a new study showing that 80 percent of land in Jerusalem cannot be purchased by Palestinians.
Watch it:
Key members of the GOP have openly supported Israel’s Jerusalem policies. Last August, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) led a congressional delegation to Israel, defended Israel’s evictions of Palestinian families from their homes in East Jerusalem to make way for Jewish settlers, and criticized the Obama administration’s efforts to halt the evictions.
In May, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele spoke at a rally sponsored by a number of pro-settlement groups, including the American Friends of Ateret Cohanim, a group that “works to transfer ownership of Arab homes to Jewish families in East Jerusalem.”
And former presidential candidate/current Fox News host/future presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has made numerous trips to Israel sponsored by Friends of Ateret Cohanim, voicing his support for the continued growth of settlements and the expulsion of the Palestinians, stating that they should be made to find a homeland “elsewhere.”
What is it these politicians are actually supporting? A European Union report last year “accused both the Israeli government and the Jerusalem municipality of working deliberately to alter the city’s demographic balance and sever East Jerusalem from the West Bank”:
[The EU report] said that both bodies assist right-wing organizations, such as Ateret Cohanim and Elad, in their efforts to implement this “strategic vision,” especially around the Holy Basin area. These organizations buy houses in Arab neighborhoods, and make “attempts to implant further Jewish settlements into the heart of the Muslim Quarter.”
The municipality, the report continued, discriminates against the city’s Arab residents with regard to building permits, health services, education, sanitation and more.
All of this has been reported on for years by Israeli human rights organizations like B’Tselem, Ir Amim, and Peace Now, as well as international human rights NGOs like Amnesty international and Human Rights Watch, all of whom are under increasing attack by the Israeli government. Unfortunately, the reporting thus far hasn’t resulted either in Israel changing the policy, or in the country with the most leverage over Israel — the United States — taking serious steps to get Israel to change the policy, which generates understandable resentment and anger among Palestinians, which in turn powers extremism and violence.
Cross-posted on the Wonk Room.
CNN Caves To Right Wing Neocons By Firing Its Mideast Reporter Octavia Nasr
CNN Caves To Right Wing Neocons By Firing Its Mideast Reporter Octavia Nasr
On Sunday, Octavia Nasr — CNN’s Senior Editor of Mideast Affairs — acknowledged the death of Lebanon’s Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah by tweeting:
Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah.. One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot..
Fadlallah was well known for a number of relatively liberal views, such as his support for women’s rights and fatwas against the brutal practices of female circumcision and honor killings. But Nasr’s comment was enough to spark fierce outrage from the various precincts of the neocon blog/twittersphere, who went after Nasr for her egregious failure to reduce Fadlallah to an anti-Israel, anti-American terrorist bogeyman.
Responding to the uproar, Nasr wrote, “It was an error of judgment for me to write such a simplistic comment and I’m sorry because it conveyed that I supported Fadlallah’s life’s work. That’s not the case at all”:
Here’s what I should have conveyed more fully:
I used the words “respect” and “sad” because to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman’s rights. He called for the abolition of the tribal system of “honor killing.” He called the practice primitive and non-productive. He warned Muslim men that abuse of women was against Islam. [...]
Sayyed Fadlallah. Revered across borders yet designated a terrorist. Not the kind of life to be commenting about in a brief tweet. It’s something I deeply regret.
A good clarification, but almost certainly not enough to silence the sanctimonious neoconservative whining.
Mediate now reports that, based on an internal CNN memo, Nasr will be leaving CNN. “[A]t this point,” writes CNN Senior VP Parisa Khosravi, “we believe that her credibility in her position as senior editor for Middle Eastern affairs has been compromised going forward.”
And so, once again, the neocons have managed to help make us all a little bit dumber. The punchline here is that Sayyed Fadlallah was the religious guide, or marja’ al-taqlid, to numerous members of Iraq’s ruling Da’wa Party, including Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. This means that they looked to Fadlallah as a source of religious authority on matters relating to correct Islamic life and practice, and committed to following his edicts on those matters.
So here’s the neocon logic: When a reporter acknowledges the passing of a revered, if controversial figure in a way that doesn’t sufficiently convey what a completely evil terrorist neocons think that figure was — that’s unacceptable. But when the United States spends nearly a trillion dollars, loses over 4,000 of its own troops and over 100,000 Iraqis to establish a new government largely dominated by that same “terrorist’s” avowed acolytes — that’s victory.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll