Stephen Sniegoski
Kalle Lasn, wrote...and all hell has broken loose.
Mon Apr 12, 2004 01:20
63.228.145.202

Stephen Sniegoski - hectorpv@comcast.net
4-7-4

"Obviously, the very fact that one cannot speak the obvious truth about Jews, without facing serious intimidation, helps to underscore the magnitude of Jewish power. And it shows why virtually no one in a mainstream position dares to deal openly with the neocon role in the Iraq war and Israel's connection to the war. "

A left-wing Canadian journalist, Kalle Lasn, wrote the obvious, and all hell has broken loose.

Lasn, the editor of the (highly-praised) Canadian journal 'Adbusters', had the audacity to state, in the March/April issue, that the neocons are Jewish and proceeded to list 50 neocons, finding that 26 were Jewish. Moreover, he stated that the neocons have a "special affinity" for Israel and that their influence helps to tilt US foreign policy toward Israel.

Now, Lasn was very careful to say that neocons only represented a segment of the American population. Lasn writes: "Drawing attention to the Jewishness of the neocons is a tricky game. Anyone who does so can count on automatically being smeared as an anti-Semite. But the point is not that Jews (who make up less than 2 percent of the American population) have a monolithic perspective. Indeed, American Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat and many of them disagree strongly with Ariel Sharon's policies and Bush's aggression in Iraq. The point is simply that the neocons seem to have a special affinity for Israel that influences their political thinking and consequently American foreign policy in the Middle East."
In "free thinking" Canada such language can lead to more than the usual smears by influential Jewish groups (and concomitant loss of job, blacklisting, etc), as is the case in the US, but can include actual criminal penalties as well. As the article that I have included from the Canadian Jewish News points out: "Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific region, director Erwin Nest said CJC 'will be considering action' against Adbusters, but declined to elaborate."
Yes, to point out the Doug Feith, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz are Jewish should certainly be regarded as a serious crime! But what do neocons themselves say?
Neocon Joshua Muravchik, in an article entitled "The Neoconservative Cabal," published in the September 2003 issue of 'Commentary Magazine', writes: "The neoconservatives, it turns out, are also in large proportion Jewish--and this, to their detractors, constitutes evidence of the ulterior motives that lurk behind the policies they espouse."
http://www.aei.org/include/news_print.asp?newsID=19107
'Commentary' has been the flagship of neoconservatism and is published by the American Jewish Committee. And Muravchik's piece is actually a defense of the neoconservatives. So, I guess it's OK for Jewish neocons to admit their Jewishness but it is criminal "anti-Semitism" for gentile critics to say the very same thing.
Obviously, the very fact that one cannot speak the obvious truth about Jews, without facing serious intimidation, helps to underscore the magnitude of Jewish power. And it shows why virtually no one in a mainstream position dares to deal openly with the neocon role in the Iraq war and Israel's connection to the war. But now let's move into a taboo implication of the prohibition of discussing the Jewish/Israel connection to the Iraq war. And this involves the origins of the September 11 terrorism.
As I have pointed out in other messages, it seems that Israel was aware of the September 11 terrorists. We know that some Mossad agents lived on the same street in Florida as Mohammed Atta, and that other Mossad agents filmed the burning Trade Towers from across the Hudson River. These occurrences would definitely seem to be other than pure coincidence.
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/Chronicles/August2003/0803CIA.html
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_5.htm
No mainstream journalist, much less Congress, dares to investigate this issue. Let us ask the hypothetical: If Israel were somehow involved in the events of 9/11, could it get away with it? If it's dangerous to even state the obvious fact that neocons are largely Jews who have an affinity for Israel, it would be a veritable actual death sentence to plumb the depths of a murky conspiracy to try to implicate the Israelis in 9/11. Everyone realizes this. Thus, the established media has managed to ignore the whole Israeli spying (on America) issue - beyond some early brief references.
Here is a simple question: Would Sharon's government do anything that might harm the United States or American citizens if it thought such an action were vital for Israeli security and that it could get completely away with it? We know that this war was seen as important for Israel, to the extent that it produced some of the phony WMD lies. Would Israel do anything to harm the US?
Let's check the past record. Israel was certainly willing to take American lives when it attacked the USS Liberty. The government of Yitzhak Shamir is reported to have sold the Soviet Union valuable U.S. documents stolen by Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard - information which, once in Soviet hands, led to the death of American agents. Moreover, in recent years Israel has resold to China sophisticated American weaponry that could easily be turned against the United States. Finally, according to a study released right before September 11, 2001 by the Army's School of Advanced Military Studies, the Israeli Mossad was sufficiently ruthless to target American forces and place the blame on Arab terrorists. About the Mossad, the study stated: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act."
http://www.public-action.com/911/sams.html

http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_6.htm
It might also be added that Ariel Sharon is about the boldest and most ruthless Israeli politician ever to hold office. In short, the fact that the discussion of any Israeli connection to war on Iraq is totally taboo serves to make it more likely that Israel would dare to be connected to the September 11 terrorism. This doesn't mean that there's definite proof that Israel was involved in September 11 terrorism. Only that if Israel were involved, no mainstream organization or individual would ever dare to investigate the situation to come up with proof. And knowing this, it would seem plausible that Sharon would try to pull something off, if he thought it would significantly benefit Israel. In fact, a more reasonable question would be: why would Sharon refrain from such an endeavor?
http://www.jewishottawa.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=106174
Jewish 'Neocons' Tilt U.S. Policy Toward Israel

By Ron Csillag
Canadian Jewish News
The editor of a left-wing Vancouver-based magazine is defending his own recent article that singles out prominent American neo-conservative Jews for, he says, tilting the Mideast policies of President George W. Bush toward Israel. The March/April issue of Adbusters checked off the names of 26 Jews on a list of 50 hawkish "neocons" said to have cozy relations with the war-minded U.S. Defence Department. The Jewish names include writers Norman Podhoretz and Irving Kristol; Deputy U.S. Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz; former arms negotiators Richard Perle; and academic Daniel Pipes.
They appear alongside U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Vice-President Dick Cheney and former UN ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick. But the religions of those people are not identified.
"A lot of ink has been spilled chronicling the pro-Israel leanings of American neocons and the fact that a disproportionate percentage of them are Jewish," states the article, titled "Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?" "Some commentators are worried that these individuals -- labeled 'Likudniks' for their links to Israel's right-wing Likud party -- do not distinguish enough between American and Israeli interests," it goes on.
"For example, whose interests were they protecting in pushing for war in Iraq?" Adbusters, an alternative bi-monthly known for its biting anti-consumerist, anti-globalization stance, says it decided "to tackle the issue head on." What those on the list share "is the view that the U.S. is a benevolent hyper power that must protect itself by reshaping the rest of the world into its morally superior image. And half of them are Jewish."
Kalle Lasn, the article's author and the magazine's editor, told The CJN he felt compelled to write the piece because "the mainstream and alternative media are somehow scared of talking about the Jewishness of the neocons and the Zionism there and the influence this has on American foreign policy in the Middle East." Other media outlets "just don't have the guts because they're afraid of this kind of vociferous backlash that I have experienced over the past few weeks." Lasn said he's received much abusive mail and even personal threats. "I really do understand what it feels like to be targeted by people who hate you."
He said the negative responses show a "kneejerk political correctness. It's almost as if many of them are Jews themselves. They're in some sort of denial. They really think that somehow it is wrong to have a debate about the Jewishness of the neocons who are, after all, the most powerful political/intellectual group in the world today. "They [neocons] literally have the power to start wars and stop wars and they are the driving force behind the Bush administration's foreign policy, not just in the Middle East, but throughout the world. They're the people who make it possible for the American administration to give $3 billion a year to Israel, and many of them are connected to the Likud party. "It's almost as though we have become so politically correct that we don't even want to discuss the obvious anymore." Lasn said he has "an incredible amount of respect" for Jews, who, owing to the Holocaust's "deep imprint" on them, have developed a keen ability to spot dictators such as Saddam Hussein. "In that way, Jewish influence is wonderful." However, "if 50 percent of the neo-cons were Arabs or Palestinian, then this war [in Iraq] would not have started."
Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific region, director Erwin Nest said CJC "will be considering action" against Adbusters, but declined to elaborate.
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/52/articles/jewish.html
Kalle Lasn From the March/April 2004 issue of Adbusters magazine. Why won't anyone say they are Jewish? Friends help each other out. That's why the US sends billions of dollars every year to Israel. In return, Israel advances US strategic interests in the Middle East. But despite this mutual back scratching, Israeli-American relations are enduring a rough patch.
Last December, a senior State Department official blasted Israel for having "done too little for far too long" to resolve the conflict with its Palestinian neighbors. Indeed, President Bush himself had scolded Israel a month earlier with his demand that "Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people and not prejudice final negotiations with the building of walls and fences." Harsh words, but is it all just window-dressing? This was not the first time Bush criticized Israel and he has made numerous calls for a "viable" Palestinian state during his presidency. Nevertheless, he has never concretely punished Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for ignoring US directives and shrugging off his commitment to the peace process. It's also worth noting that diplomatic admonitions are the responsibility of the State Department which has been on the losing end of the policy wars in Bush's White House.
One wonders what Israeli-American relations, and indeed what American relations with the rest of the world would look like if the neocon hawks who control Rumsfeld's Defense Department were also in charge at State. A lot of ink has been spilled chronicling the pro-Israel leanings of American neocons and fact that a the disproportionate percentage of them are Jewish. Some commentators are worried that these individuals - labeled 'Likudniks' for their links to Israel's right wing Likud party - do not distinguish enough between American and Israeli interests.
For example, whose interests were they protecting in pushing for war in Iraq? Drawing attention to the Jewishness of the neocons is a tricky game. Anyone who does so can count on automatically being smeared as an anti-Semite. But the point is not that Jews (who make up less than 2 percent of the American population) have a monolithic perspective. Indeed, American Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat and many of them disagree strongly with Ariel Sharon's policies and Bush's aggression in Iraq. The point is simply that the neocons seem to have a special affinity for Israel that influences their political thinking and consequently American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Here at Adbusters, we decided to tackle the issue head on and came up with a carefully researched list of who appear to be the 50 most influential neocons in the US (see above). Deciding exactly who is a neocon is difficult since some neocons reject the term while others embrace it. Some shape policy from within the White House, while others are more peripheral, exacting influence indirectly as journalists, academics and think tank policy wonks. What they all share is the view that the US is a benevolent hyper power that must protect itself by reshaping the rest of the world into its morally superior image. And half of the them are Jewish.
http://www.rense.com/general37/behind.htm
Behind The Scenes Of The Iraq War
Pravda.ru
4-17-3
The plan for the Iraq war, which has erupted in the face of opposition from the entire world, was drawn up at least decades ago, by Israeli strategists
In its attempt to realize its strategy of destabilizing or dividing the Middle Eastern Arab states, Israel has Egypt, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia on its list of subsequent targets.
As these lines are being written, the United States of America has begun striking at Iraq. Despite the fact that most countries of the world, and even the majority of the USA's allies, opposed it, the US administration was determined for the strike to go ahead. When we look behind the scenes of this insistence, it seems that Israel and its powerful lobby in the US, have the greatest share in the make-up.
In fact, Israel's policy aimed at the fragmentation of Iraq has lengthy historical roots-
The Age-Old Israeli Plan to Divide Iraq
An ambitious report entitled "A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s," which appeared in the World Zionist Organization's periodical Kivunim in February 1982 disclosed a strategy aimed at making the whole of the Middle East a kind of "living space" for Israel. The report, drawn up by Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist and formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel, set out the scenario of the "division of Iraq" in these terms:
Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria- Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi'ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren't for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq's future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past- In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. 1)
This was not the only announcement of the Israeli plan to atomize Middle East, including Iraq. As Israel Shahak, the notable Israeli scholar known for his dedication to a peaceful solution in the Middle East, explained that Yinon was ju

• Behind The Scenes Of The Iraq War — Pravda.ru, Mon Apr 12 01:24