Friday, January 12, 2007


Iran and the New York "money people"

Former presidential candidate Wesley Clark didn't learn an important lesson from his campaign of 2004, such as "Whatever you do, don't offend the Jews." Clark ran into Arianna Huffington at Nancy Pelosi's swearing in and confessed his fears that the U.S. is preparing to bomb Iran. He also committed the gaffe of saying

You just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers.

Actually Clark didn't have to read the Israeli press because right-wing columnist Arnaud de Borchgrave had already laid out the details for the Moonie wire service. Here are a few of the juicier tidbits—

In today's Israel, the overwhelming majority is now convinced Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is synonymous with a 2nd holocaust.... In a New Year's Day message, superhawk and former Prime Minister Netanyahu Binyamin accused Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of the kind of appeasement that threatened Israel's very existence.

Netanyahu and Neocons everywhere absolutely detested the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group (ISG) report, which goes a long way to explaining why it arrived with such hype only to disappear without a trace. For starters, the report (1) suggested the "rank appeasement" of holding talks with Iran and Syria, (2) put resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the first requirement for bringing stability to the Middle East, and (3) unconscionably revealed that "The majority of the political establishment in Israel has grown tired of a continuous state of a nation at war."

So what should Israel do? Start a campaign, as it did with Iraq, to convince the U.S. to attack Iran—

Netanyahu then said Israel "must immediately launch an intense, international, public relations front first and foremost on the U.S. The goal being to encourage President Bush to live up to specific pledges he would not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons. We must make clear to the government, the Congress and the American public that a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S. and the entire world, not only Israel."

There are signs this is already happening in Washington. Before the invasion of Iraq, the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld troika decided the ousting of Saddam Hussein had to become an integral part of the "war on terror." Eventually 60 percent of Americans thought Saddam was behind 9/11, even though there was no link between the two. Today, the Bush-Cheney team faces the same spin scenario: how to weave the global war on terror and the Shiite powers that be in Iran. This one is relatively simple: Iran trains and funds Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Palestinian territories.

Anticipating the new line, Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent-CT) referred to "Iran and al-Qaida" on Wolf Blitzer's Sunday program on CNN. That Iran is Shiite and al-Qaida Sunni becomes irrelevant in the new game plan that will most probably lead to U.S. air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities in 2007/08.

But what about the new Democratic Congress? Can it protect the U.S. from right-wing Jews?

Can a Democratic Congress be bypassed under a blanket authorization already secured to hunt down transnational terrorists wherever they may be hiding?

The "neocons" who work closely with Netanyahu on what could be the next phase of a nascent regional war in the Middle East, say Bush has the authority to take out Iran's nuclear threat. Because it has only one purpose -- to take out Israel. One Hiroshima-type nuclear weapon and Israel ceases to exit.

And if Bush doesn't take on Iran, prominent Israelis are speculating that president Clinton 2 (Hillary) will do so. Oded Tira, the chairman of Israel's Association of Industrial Manufacturers, and former chief artillery office in the IDF, said, "Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran. As an American air strike in Iran is essential for our existence, we must help pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party, which is conducting itself foolishly, and U.S. newspaper editors."

Writing in Ynet News (online Yedioth Ahronoth), Tira said, "We need to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure. Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party (must) publicly support immediate action by Bush again [sic] Iran."

As for target Iran, Tira voiced widespread belief in Israel that the Jewish state must coordinate strikes with the U.S. -- "and prepare for the Iranian response." Fearless forecast: It will be formidable.

Well, that doesn't leave much to the imagination, does it?

Playing the antisemitic card

But Clark's truth-telling about the Jewish Money Machine has the Jewish Name-Calling and Censorship Machine running full tilt. Columnist James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal characterizes Clark's remarks as "The Protocols of 'the New York money people.'" And Washington-based Shmuel Rosner of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz asks two questions of Clark's "ramblings": "First: how and why has it become so easy to speak in this way about the Jews? Second: What does it mean politically?"

Rosner then comes up with his list of recent antisemites—

It is, actually, rather troubling, even scary. People in elite circles somehow came to the conclusion that denouncing the Jewish community and its support for Israel is now becoming acceptable. Walt and Mersheimer came first, then former president Carter, now Clark - and we already have a new trend on our hands. A Jewish leader with whom I spoke yesterday asked me this most disquieting question: Is the ice thinner than one might have thought?

And of course the Republican Jewish Coalition has chimed in calling Clark's remarks "blatantly antisemitic."

All this to distract us from the import of Clark's remarks!

The question is not whether Wesley Clark's reading of the build-up for an attack on Iran is antisemitic but whether it is true. I wish I could find fault with it, but with respect to Israel and "New York money men" Clark appears to be on the money. So count me in the ranks of the "antisemites."

Related posts
Conductor Barenboim an anti-semite? (9/6/05)
Question of the Day (1/8/07)


Post a Comment

<< Simply Appalling Home

Atom feed

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by
Blogarama - The Blog Directory

Blog Search Engine

Blog Top Sites

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?