Showing posts with label likud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label likud. Show all posts

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Yes, Barack, But How Much Do You Hate the Palestinians?

Obama gets points for even mentioning the word "Palestinian"at the raving loonies conference. Recall however, Obama supports the possibilty of a nuclear strike on Iran. He's still one very sick man, stuck in the old days of Cold War thinking.
---

I have long been appalled by the craven genuflecting before the altar of vicious nationalism that appears to have become a required ritual for would-be Democratic Party presidential candidates courting what they see as the “Jewish vote.” Not only are they required to outdo one another in the extent of support they pledge for Israel; given that the element they’re addressing (right-wing Zionists who don’t reflect even the Jewish-American mainstream) is steeped in the toxic racism common to ultra-nationalism of all stripes, what they’re really required to do is outdo one another’s pledges of hostility towards the Palestinians. Kind of like that scene in Monty Python’s “Life of Brian” where the basis for joining the People’s Front for the Liberation of Judea is your answer to the question “How much do you hate the Romans?”

And, it seems that in the case of Sentaor Barack Obama, the answer may be “Not enough.” That at least is the charge being leveled by some of this rabid nationalist self-appointed guardians of Jewishness. The New York Times reports the following:

Several Jewish conferencegoers said they were concerned by Mr. Obama’s remark Sunday in Iowa where, in a reference to the Middle East, he said, “Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people.” According to The Des Moines Register, Mr. Obama put the blame on the stalled peace efforts with Israel and on the refusal of the Palestinian government to renounce terrorism.

Mr. Obama has said in the past that both Israelis and Palestinians had “suffered” because of the lack of a peace agreement, and a spokesman said on Tuesday that Mr. Obama believed “the security of Israel should be America’s starting point in the Middle East.” Yet by singling out Palestinian suffering on Sunday, Mr. Obama could be tempting fate with some Jewish voters.

“Awarding first place in the suffering matrix is odious and infelicitous,” said Rabbi Steven Silver of Redondo Beach, Calif., after listening to Mrs. Clinton speak at a reception at the Aipac conference. “I think a lot of Americans would find that comment offensive, too.”

Mr. Silver’s son, Jesse, a college student who supports Mrs. Clinton, said he was spreading the word at the conference about Mr. Obama’s remark.

“It’s just clumsy of him to say that on the eve of the Aipac conference,” Jesse Silver said. “His inexperience is showing.”

Inexperience in what? In pandering to the cloud-cuckoo world of American right-wing Zionism? Go ask any Israeli who is suffering more, Israelis or Palestinians, and I guarantee you that 95% will say it is the Palestinians — the majority of them will probably blame the Palestinians themselves for that fact, but precious few would contest it for it is so blindingly obvious. “Odious and infelicitous” — where do they find these people?

Obama, of course, knows better. In an extended lament on how the Obama he once knew got drawn into the AIPAC sphere of influence, Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunima recalls a time when the Senator was far more inclined to engage with the plight of the Palestinians than he is now that he’s running for the Democratic nomination. (Abunima even published a picture that will surely be jumped on by Hillary’s cynical oppo research people, of Obama chatting over dinner with the late, great Edward Said — see below.)


Obama, in earlier times, sups with the late, great Edward Said

Obama’s swing from demanding an even-handed U.S. policy in the Middle East to being a pro-Israel hawk is well documented in the Jewish Week, and it seems the AIPAC crowd seems to suspect that he’s faking it. Seems Ali Abunimah doesn’t want to let Obama forget where he’s from.

If disappointing, given his historically close relations to Palestinian-Americans, Obama’s about-face is not surprising. He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power. Palestinian-Americans are in the same position as civil libertarians who watched with dismay as Obama voted to reauthorize the USA Patriot Act, or immigrant rights advocates who were horrified as he voted in favor of a Republican bill to authorize the construction of a 700-mile fence on the border with Mexico.

Here’s my advice to Obama: AIPAC is a right-wing body, even on the Jewish-American political spectrum — in Israeli terms, its orientation is strongly Likudnik, aligning it with the right-wing fringe in Israel, too. Close to 80% of American Jews, according to surveys see the Iraq war as a mistake. (As opposed to the AIPAC crowd and Israeli government, which continues to support it.)

So, when you pander to the AIPAC crowd, you are not reaching the Jewish-American mainstream (even though most of the Jewish-American mainstream is loathe to directly challenge the AIPAC crowd, for fear of being labeled traitors are worse by rabid right-wingers like Alvin Rosenfeld). Nor are you really helping Israel, because its only chance of surviving rests in its ability to make peace with its neighbors, and Israeli peaceniks will tell you that the support of the U.S. (egged on by the AIPAC crowd) for the most belligerent and hawkish positions on the Israeli spectrum is actually working against Israel’s ability to make the compromises it will have to make in order to achieve peace.

And nobody will think any less of you, Barack, if you choose to speak the truth, and what you know to be the truth, rather than half-heartedly embrace falsehoods that aren’t doing anybody any good. The right-wing Zionists aren’t going to support you no matter how hard you pander, and the liberal mainstream will respect honesty and consistency. Israel needs American leaders that can march it back from its own self-destructive impulses, rather than cheerleaders of its march of folly.

Yeah, yeah, I know, I’m wasting my breath…

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Interesting history on the rise of the Israeli far-Right

March 14, 2007

In this posting, we're going to delve into the intertwined, and quite convoluted scandals involving, among other things:

  • Alleged bribes to Ariel Sharon by Martin Schlaff, an Austrian industrialist, that were used to pay back illegal campaign contributions Sharon used in 1999.
  • The scandalous collapse of Refco, the commodity futures giant, and the related collapse of BAWAG, one of Austria's largest banks (Cerberus recently bought BAWAG, BTW).
  • Martin Schlaff's investment in Yasser Arafat's "Oasis Casino", and that casino was tied into by the BAWAG/Refco scandals AND Ariel Sharon's right-hand-man Dov Weissman.
  • Martin Schlaff's and George "Macaca" Allen's involvement with the "Xybernaut" pump-and-dump stock fraud.
  • Martin Schlaff's apparent financier of far-Right Israeli politician Avigdor Lieberman
  • and finally, the potential for a crisis in Israel's democracy due to endemic corruption, and the chilling figures that could take advantage of such a crisis.

Get to know your BAWAG
So, let's get started with a look at the BAWAG scandal that rocked Austria's politics:

Austrian Bank Scandal: When Socialists Play With Money
From the desk of Chris Gillibrand on Tue, 2006-04-04 22:53

A major banking scandal is rocking the Austrian political elites – left and right. A bank owned by the Socialist trade union (which is close to the Socialist Party SPÖ, currently in opposition) loses billions in shady hedge deals while the union strike fund evaporates in the Caribbean and the bank gets implicated in a corruption case in Israel. Meanwhile the bank is financed by the European Investment Bank (EIB), and an Austrian Finance Ministry official (married to the Socialist ex-chief of the bank) ignores a crucial report and is appointed to the Executive Board of the European Central Bank (ECB). The Conservative Finance Minister claims to know nothing – after just having sold the Government-owned Post Office Savings Bank (PSK) to the socialist bank. Welcome to Austria, presently presiding the European Union council of ministers.

Let me introduce!

The Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft AG, BAWAG or in English, ‘Bank for Employment and Commerce’ was founded in 1922 by the Socialist Chancellor Karl Renner. Up until now the majority stakeholder in the Bank has been the Austrian Trades Union Federation, the ÖGB. With the repurchase of the shares of the Bayerische Landesbank in 2004, it is now wholly-owned by the ÖGB. The bank’s original intent, from which it has strayed far, was to extend cheap credits to the needy.

Almost all of the members of the BAWAG Supervisory Board are fully paid up socialists and trade unionists. The two exceptions are Albert Hochleitner, the ex-CEO of Siemens Austria, and Leo Wallner, the chairman of the state-owned monopoly, Casinos Austria. Günter Weninger, chairman of the Supervisory Board, who has now been forced to resign, also has a day job as the Finance Chief of the ÖGB. He started professional life as an electrician which has given rise to suggestions in the Austrian press that he might have to return to his original trade. The Managing Board has eight members, four of whom have now resigned. The CEO, Johann Zwettler had already resigned in October 2005. He and his predecessor, Helmut Elsner, are now under police investigation.

...

Make of note of Casinos Austria's CEO sitting on BAWAG's board, as it will figure in heavily once we get to Arafat's "Oasis Casino".

Continuing...

...
BAWAG opened up operations in the Caribbean in 1995 under the direction of Wolfgang Flöttl, the son of the then CEO, Walter Flöttl. The idea was that these investments should hedge risk. When it was made public that the son received $2 billion from BAWAG without the father seeking the formal approval of the Supervisory Board, the Caribbean business got closed after a year. The extent of Supervisory Board knowledge is still questioned.

After the departure of Flöttl Senior, the business was then reopened by Flöttl’s successor, Helmut Elsner, with Supervisory Board approval after only one year. Elsner was already known as Flöttl’s "man for big business." Living well, he enjoyed a service penthouse provided on the top of the BAWAG offices in Vienna as had his predecessor, Flöttl. Also provided with a penthouse was the head of the socialist trade union ÖGB, Fritz Verzetnitsch.

This time around, Flöttl Junior invested in high-risk funds and the business clocked up a massive loss of almost €1 billion which threatened the solvency of BAWAG in 2000. The Bank was only saved by a guarantee from the ÖGB (trade union dues amount to 1% of members salaries, so they have accumulated quite a lot of money to play with). The losses themselves were systematically covered up in offshore accounts in the Caribbean and accounts at a US futures broker called REFCO. The union strike fund went walkabouts as collateral in the Caribbean and disappeared.
...

There's much more interesting info on BAWAG in that article, so be sure to check it out.

BAWAG, Refco, Martin Schlaff, PIPEs, and George Allen's Xybernaut scandal
Before we move on to look at how BAWAG and Refco were used for money-laundering by Yasser Arafat(with a great deal of intertwined involved by Ariel Sharon's clique), we should note that BAWAG was sold to Cerberus back in December. One of its new board members includes Former Treasury Secretary John Snow. The purchase of a financial behemoth like BAWAG isn't the only major purchase Cerberus has made recently. In addition to the Bank Leumi takeover, Cerberus acquired a majority stake in GMAC last year, and is reportedly eyeing Chrysler.

These kinds of mega deals pretty amazing when you consider that Cerberus, starting with $10 million in capital in 1992 started off investing the high-risk corporate debt market, moving into outright acquisitions and management of small distressed companies. The purchase of the ailing BAWAG by Cerberus is also somewhat ironic given that BAWAG, in coordination with Refco, was a significant player in the PIPE (Private Investment in Public Equity) market. The PIPE market often act as a source of last resort role for small-cap companies in need of a capital infusion.

And, it turns out, one of the figures involved in with the BAWAG/Refco dealings in the PIPE Market, is the Austrian billionaire Martin Schlaff that will come up quite a bit in Ariel Sharon's scandals.

One of Schlaff's companies used in the PIPE market was Balmore, a British Virgin-Islands-based hedge fund. But Balmore has some other interesting history, as an investor in Xybernaut, a tech company that had George Allen on its board from form August 1998-Dec 2000. Like just about every corporation we're looking at here, Xybernaut's managers, "improperly used substantial company funds for personal expenses" and faces multiple class-action lawsuits. For more Balmore's role in Xybernaut, let's take at look at this Sept 2006 article from the American Prospect:

....
Starting in 2000, however, Xybernaut increasingly turned to a newly popular financial instrument to keep growing -- and going: so-called PIPE deals, short for "private investments in public equity." In such deals, private investors are granted warrants or convertible debentures for stock at below-market rates in exchange for financing. All the investor has to do to make money is sell the stock. But some sleazy PIPE financiers go a step further by shorting the stock of the companies they finance, driving down share prices, diluting the shares of other investors, and even -- in a particularly egregious form of illegal short selling known as the "death spiral finance scheme" -- driving the company into bankruptcy through aggressive rounds of financing and short selling. Between March and November 2000, Xybernaut went from 1 percent to more than 15 percent owned by institutional investors who acquired their stock in the company through private deals, according to media reports.

"It really rode the Internet bubble, and it was real hot stuff," recalls Gregory Sichenzia, of Sichenzia Ross Friedman Ference LLP, a law firm that specializes in securities and PIPE transactions, which he described as an increasingly traditional financing mechanism. "It’s not the fault of the financing that the company collapsed."

Several firms that financed Xybernaut during Allen’s tenure on its board, however, have since been linked to a complicated international network of troubled financers and brokers. For example, in April 1998, Balmore Funds SA and Liechtenstein-based Austost Anstalt Schaan signed a private placement deal with Xybernaut granting the firm up to $11 million. One of their registrations of stock for sale came April 4, 2000 -- shortly after the March price peak and a period of unusually high volume trading, which was followed by yet another "going concern letter," in mid-March, and a decline in the stock price. The signatory for Austost Anstalt Schaan was Thomas Hackl, who was from 1991 to 2002 head of treasury at BAWAG, the fourth largest Austrian bank (itself somewhat controversial for losing millions in the financing of Yasir Arafat’s casino outside Jericho). TheStreet.com has linked BAWAG to Austost and also to the hedge fund Alpha Capital Aktiengesellschaft, which invested in Xybernaut in 2001. Last year Hackl became a major figure in the collapse of Wall Street brokerage the Refco Corp., where he was executive vice president, in an accounting scandal that wiped out more than $1 billion in shareholder value.
...
Despite the plethora of dubious characters surrounding Xybernaut, the true identity of many of the company’s financiers remains obscure. In the company’s heyday, its officers claimed to have the support of major Wall Street firms, but that was more hype. What SEC records show instead is that during the company’s 16-year history, it relied heavily on offshore firms for financing. And during Allen’s board tenure, it received the vast bulk of its money from outfits based in the most notorious havens for tax cheats and money launderers: the Turks and Caicos, the Cayman Islands, the British Virgin Islands, the Bahamas, Liechtenstein, and Israel.
...

So that's the interesting set up connections between BAWAG, Refco, Martin Schlaff, and George Allen. And if you're interesting a very long read on BAWAG, the Refco collapse, how this all relates to the Enron scandal, and the dangers associated with the unregulated explosion in the use of derivatives and hedge fund go here and here.

An Oasis of naughtiness
Now let's move on and take closer look at the Oasis Casino in Jericho and it's complicated dealings with the BAWAG, Refco, and figures close to Ariel Sharon with this June, 2006 Bloomberg article:

Refco Bank Hid $1 Billion Loss From Hedge Funds, Arafat Casino

June 22 (Bloomberg) -- At the Israeli army checkpoint on the edge of Jericho, gamblers from Jerusalem and Tel Aviv streamed into the West Bank town to wager on blackjack, play poker and face off with slot machines at the Palestinian-run Oasis Hotel Casino Resort. The casino was open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The party that started in September 1998 ended when a Palestinian uprising scared away customers in October 2000, forcing the casino to close within a month.

The Israeli shells that punched holes in the Oasis's stucco- and-black-glass facade also struck a financial blow to one of the casino's investors, Vienna-based Bawag PSK Bank -- the same bank that backed Refco Inc., the New York-based brokerage that collapsed last October after belatedly reporting $430 million in hidden losses.

...

Drexel Burham Lambert, BTW, is where Cerberus found Stephen Feinberg got his start in the 80's. Skipping down in this lengthy and excellent article, we'll see how Martin Schlaff helped bring together BAWAG and Yasser Arafat in the Casino deal. Keep in mind that, as we're going to see, Schlaff is also a primary figure in the Ariel Sharon bribery scandal ...

...
Risky Ventures
Following the probe, Walter Flottl retired in 1995, handing the bank's leadership to Elsner. The new CEO expanded Bawag's relationship with Refco and started other risky ventures.

Elsner found such an investment in the Palestinian territories. Arafat, as president of the Palestinian Authority, was on the hunt for ways to develop the local economy after the 1993 Oslo Accord created the framework for Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza, former Finance Minister Salam Fayyad says.

Austrian investor Martin Schlaff helped bring Bawag together with Arafat's advisers to build a casino in Jericho, according to Palestinian Authority records that list Schlaff as a board member and officer of the casino.

Schlaff was one of Bawag's biggest customers. Schlaff declined to answer written questions submitted to Michael Fink, his spokesman in Vienna.

On Dec. 17, 1996, Palestine Commercial Services Co., an investment company controlled by Arafat, signed an agreement with a group of Austrian investors, including Bawag, according to a report on the investment's history and financial value commissioned by the Palestinian Authority.

Oasis

The casino would be owned by CAP Holding AG, a Liechtenstein- based company whose shareholders were Bawag, with 11 percent; Vienna-based Casinos Austria International, with 16.5 percent; Palestine Commercial Services, with 23.1 percent; and a company called MS Privatstiftung -- controlled by Schlaff -- with 49.5 percent, according to Palestinian Authority and Casinos Austria documents.

Casinos Austria ran the Oasis, along with 62 other casinos in 17 countries and nine gambling ships.

...

Seven months later, on Sept. 28, violence erupted in Jerusalem as Ariel Sharon, then head of Israel's opposition Likud Party, visited the plaza that contains al-Aqsa Mosque, the third- holiest site in Islam, and the Western Wall, the most sacred location in Judaism.

Casino Closed

An uprising spread throughout the West Bank and Gaza, and in the following month, the casino closed. The hotel stayed open, with managers herding guests, including women and children, into the basement for hours at a time during gun battles.

...

With no customers at the gaming tables, the value of the casino plummeted. Still, Bawag engineered a transaction that -- for accounting purposes anyway -- transformed a stricken investment into one worth 120 million euros, Bawag's nonprosecution agreement says.

...

The article goes on to provide further details on the financial trickery employed to hide the BAWAG's losses in Oasis Casino.

Sharon's campaign finance fun
Now we're going to move on, and take a look at Ariel Sharon's campaign loan scandal with this May 2004 Jpost article:

Sunday, May 9, 2004
Weisglass pushed Sharon to reopen Jericho casino
Yaakov Katz The Jerusalem Post May 6, 2004

During negotiations with the Labor Party in October 2000 over the
possibility of the Likud joining a national unity government, Ariel Sharon
was asked by attorney Dov Weisglass, today his bureau chief, to speak with then premier Ehud Barak over the possibility of reopening the casino in Palestinian-controlled Jericho
, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

The casino is jointly owned by the Palestinian Authority, Casinos Austria,
the Austrian bank BAWAG, and Austrian-Jewish businessman Martin Schlaff, a
key figure in the ongoing police investigation of the prime minister and his son, Gilad. "At the time I did not think anything was too strange with Weisglass's request, since at the time we knew that he was an attorney for the casino," said one of the participants at a meeting in October 2000 at the Sharon ranch. "But now, with the allegations that Sharon may have received bribes from Schlaff, the meeting and the request seem suspicious."

...

Following his victory in the 1999 Likud Party leadership primaries, Sharon went into debt to repay NIS 4.7 million in illegal campaign contributions. Gilad Sharon received a $1.5 million loan, originating in Austria, from South Africa-based businessman Cyril Kern in order to repay another loan the family had taken out in order to return the illegal donations.
...

The illegal campaign contributions in question funnelled to Sharon via Annex Research, a company set up in 1999 by Sharon's close aide Dov Weisglass in concert with Sharon's son, Omri. Weisglass also happens to be the lawyer for Martin Schlaff's investments in Israel as well as Casino Austria's Israeli investments. Weisglass was also reportedly in daily contact with Condoleeza Rice.

One of the fellows that is believed to be a funder Annex Research is Arie Genger. Genger acted as a private back channel between Sharon and the Bush administration, and also reportedly worked freqently with Condoleeza Rice.

Continuing...

...
The police are investigating the possibility that Kern served as a front man for Schlaff, another friend of Sharon's, and a businessman heavily invested in Israel, who could have made the loan in the hope that Sharon would make decisions favorable to his business interests, including the reopening of the Jericho casino.

"We met to talk about whether Sharon should join a unity government with
Barak, and Weisglass told Arik to pressure Barak into reopening the casino," the source said. "They agreed that if Sharon joined the coalition, then they would ease restrictions on the Palestinians in Jericho in order to inadvertently allow for the casino to reopen."
...

A quick summary


The article goes on to provide many other details on this case, but let's just summarize some of what we've seen thus far regarding this Casino:

So Martin Schlaff, and Austrian billionaire and friend of Sharon, invested heavily in a casino venture in Jericho along with Yasser Arafat. Another investor in the casino was BAWAG, the bank of the Austria trade unions that imploded in the joint Refco and embezzlement scandals. Both Schlaff and Casinos Austria were major investors in BAWAG.

Sharon's close adviser and chief of staff Dov Weisglass. Weisglass was also involved in setting up some shell companies used to funnel campaign money to Sharon back in 1999. When Sharon was forced to pay back that money, he received a $1.5 million loan from a South African, Cyril Kern, that was believed to be acting as a front man for Martin Schlaff. The loan, with flowed through BAWAG accounts, is believed that the loan represented a bribe to encourage Sharon to allow the reopening of the Oasis Casino, which had been closed down due to the the second Intifada.

Oh, and Cerberus, the large hedge fund that is a major force in Israel's economy, recently bought BAWAG, which was put up for sale by the Austrian trade unions in order to cover their losses over the BAWAG/Refco twin implosions.

On a tangential note, while the involvement of Sharon's close aide in a business deal with Yasser Arafat may seem like an example of strange bedfellows, it's not quite as unusual an arrangement as one might think. Take, for example, Silvio Berlusconi, a major Bush backer and Iraq war supporter: His Swiss-investment adviser, Pier Felice Barchi, doubled as the lawyer for the al-Taqwa, the Muslim Brotherhood's bank! (More on that here) And then there's the GOP's own Muslim-Brotherhood-linked Get-out-the-vote operation.

So now that we're sort of caught up with all this, let's complicate it some more!

Uncooperative Austria

So, adding scandal to scandal, it looks like Austria's government may have jumped into the Sharon bribery game too!

Austrian MP Calls for Inquiry Into Sharon’s Vienna Dealings

Marc Perelman, With Reporting by Chemi Shalev in Jerusalem. | Fri. Aug 08, 2003

An Austrian lawmaker is calling for a formal inquiry into charges that Vienna is blocking an Israeli investigation of alleged campaign finance violations by Prime Minister Sharon — purportedly in exchange for Jerusalem’s agreement to restore diplomatic ties with the alpine nation.

...

Pilz said further investigations could be on the way. He said Justice Ministry officials had told him they were considering launching further investigations into allegations that the Austrian government had used money channeled via Austria to Sharon from a South African businessman, Cyril Kern, to influence Israeli policy. He did not specify what sort of influence his government might have been seeking.

...

Speculation has been rife in the Israeli press in recent days that Sharon agreed to restore ties with Vienna only after an Austrian judge rejected several requests from Israeli police to subpoena bank records related to the Sharon investigation. Israeli police have asked to see records of a possible transfer of funds from Vienna’s Bawag Bank to a Tel Aviv bank account owned by the prime minister’s sons.

An Austrian judge has twice rejected Israeli requests to examine the bank records. The first request was rejected because the Israeli request came in an incorrect format. The second was rejected on grounds that foreign campaign financing is not a criminal offense in Austria. There were reports that a third request had been made on Wednesday, but it could not be confirmed by press time.

...

Israeli newspaper reports have suggested that Justice Ministry officials connected to the far-right Freedom Party might have played a role in Austria’s rejection of the Israeli subpoena requests. Pilz noted that the rejection had come from a judge, not a ministry official.

...
Sources in Jerusalem told the Forward that Sharon had been personally involved in calling for an upgrade of diplomatic relations with Austria. Moreover, the sources said, the decision was pushed by the political appointees within the Foreign Ministry rather than by the professional staff, which had allegedly rejected the restoration of ties last November and eventually acceded two weeks ago.

Israel downgraded its ties with Austria in 2000, together with members of the European Union, after the Freedom Party, then led by far-right activist Jorg Haider, was brought into the governing coalition. Haider has since resigned from the party leadership, leading European countries to restore ties. However, the Freedom Party remains in the coalition, which Israel had until last week cited as a reason for continuing the chill. Critics have called on the government to explain its shift.
...

Two years after these suspicions, the Austrian government launched a probe of the whole bribery affair, while asserting that it was the Israeli police that were lackluster in their pursuit of evidence. So now that it's all nice and extra confusing, let's add another figure to this whole mess.

Avigdor Friedman, a far-Rightist friend of Martin Schlaff
While Mr. Schlaff may claim his investment in the Oasis Casino was intended to promote peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, his investment in Avigdnor Friedman probably doesn't fall in the category of peace-promotion:

Police probing Lieberman on suspicion of illegal business ties
By Baruch Kra

The police have been conducting a lengthy inquiry into suspicions that Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman has an illegal business relationship with Austrian businessman Martin Schlaff, who has substantial business interests in Israel.
...
Haaretz has learned that several years ago, during a special session of an Austrian parliamentary committee investigating that country's intelligence services, information came up regarding business connections between Martin Schlaff, the Austrian businessman who is believed to own 50 percent of the Jericho casino, and Lieberman, and how money was transferred to the political party Lieberman established, Yisrael Beitenu.
...

One of the main constituents for the Yisrael Beitenu party that Liberman formed are disaffected Likudniks that feel Likud just isn't right-wing enough.

In 2002, Lieberman called for the bombing of Palestinian gas stations, banks, and commercial centers in response to suicide bombings. In 2004, he pitched the "Lieberman Plan" that essentially involved complete separation of Arab and Jewish populations. In October 2006, Lieberman joined Ehud Olmert's cabinet in the position of "Minister of Strategic Threats", which was created primarily to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Along with Schlaff, another figure that has assisted Lieberman and his party is top GOP strategist Arthur Finklestein.

And perhaps most chillingly of all, Lieberman is seen as a rising star in Israel's politics:

...
Far from his nakedly anti-Arab approach disqualifying him from the political mainstream, Lieberman is today its rising star. He was welcomed into the ruling coalition in October as "minister for strategic threats" and is now the main ally and crutch of faltering Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

An immigrant from the former Soviet Union who lives in the illegal West Bank settlement of Nokdim, Lieberman is stoking anti-Arab sentiment and exploiting insecurity and disillusionment after the fiasco of last summer's Lebanon war. Top office, or at least the Defense Ministry, is a realistic goal for Lieberman, a shrewd political tactician who helped Benjamin Netanyahu gain election as Prime Minister in 1996 and served in Ariel Sharon's Cabinet. "If elections were held now, based on the polls, he could presumably be either prime minister or demand any other ministry he wanted," says Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies.

If Lieberman's pronouncements are to be taken seriously--and there is no obvious reason they should not be--a Lieberman government would exclude some Arab citizens from Israel, would expel others who refuse to sign a loyalty-to-Zionism oath, would turn Gaza into Grozny and would execute Arab members of the Knesset who talk to Hamas or mark Israel Independence Day as the anniversary of the displacement of the Palestinians in 1948.

Many Israelis--and many Americans--are sleeping through the rise of Lieberman. Others are through their actions facilitating the ascendance of fascist ideas in Israel. Lieberman is more than kosher as far as Washington is concerned. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice welcomed him at the State Department on December 11, a day after he was featured at a forum, sponsored by the Brookings Institution's Saban Center, that also included Bill Clinton, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and several other members of Congress.
...

So yeah, fascism appears to be on the rise in Israel as the public turns sour on corruption. Whoopy! And neither is Lieberman the only proto-fascist whose star is rising...

Arkady Gaydamak, a well-armed rising star
now let's take a look at Israel's wannabe kingmaker:

My clout will make Netanyahu PM says Israel's wannabe kingmaker
BEN LYNFIELD IN JERUSALEM

A RUSSIAN-BORN billionaire wanted by French authorities for alleged arms trafficking yesterday positioned himself as potential kingmaker of Israel by announcing a new "social movement" that will give expression to his growing political clout.

Arkady Gaydamak - who has gained a degree of popularity in Israel with a series of high-profile philanthropy projects amid deepening public disgust with established politicians - told The Scotsman last night that his "Social Justice Movement" would enable him to influence politicians without holding public office.

Mr Gaydamak, 54, says he does not have the experience or desire to hold high office. He says the person best suited to be prime minister is Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing Likud party.
...
A 2002 study by the non-profit Centre for Public Integrity, based in Washington, described Mr Gaydamak as "an entrepreneur with global ties to arms smuggling, resource exploitation and private military companies".
...

We should note that one of the conflicts in which Mr. Gaydamak sold his wares was the diamond-fueled Angolan civil war in the 90's. And while Gayadamak was selling his arms to the Angolan government, it was none of than arms-smuggler extraordinaire Victor Bout that was selling to the UNITA rebels. (For more on the most mysterious and important Bout empire, go here and skip down to the section "What the arms trade is all about")

Continuing...

...
Israeli analysts see Mr Gaydamek's alliance with Mr Netanyahu as a milestone in the country's politics. Approval ratings for the prime minister, Ehud Olmert, are plummeting after the debacle of last summer's Lebanon war and corruption scandals, while the right wing is rising in popularity. Mr Gaydamek, they say, can deliver to Mr Netanyahu a large chunk of the crucial Russian-speaking immigrant vote, while Mr Netanyahu can offer Mr Gaydamak access to the pinnacle of power.

"Gaydamek has huge resources and can buy up Israeli politics and politicians," says Danny Gutwein, a historian at Haifa University. "He will enlist the Russian vote for Netanyahu. Basically, capitalism will replace democracy."
...

Capitalism will replace democracy, eh? Its sounds kind of a like fascism. It also sounds in keeping with what's been taking place across in democratic countries across the world. But as this recent article suggests, Israel's march toward fascism and into the embrace of oligarchic right-wing ideologues just might happen sooner rather than later:


Is Israel Falling Apart?
By Dror Wahrman

Mr. Wahrman is Ruth N. Halls Professor of History and Director of the Center for Eighteenth-Century Studies at the Indiana University History Department (adjunct in English, Jewish Studies, Cultural Studies).

Foreign observers of Israel tend to focus so intently on the dangers the country faces from its Arab neighbours that they have largely missed an astonishing story that has been accelerating over the past few months: that of the Jewish state’s possible move toward internal collapse. If you consider this an exaggeration, just take note of what the past couple of weeks have brought about. A few days ago the chief of the Israeli police resigned after an investigation that found several of Israel’s highest police officers guilty of corruption and negligence. This came within a week of the forced resignation of Israel’s Chief of Staff from the military because of the fiascos of the second Lebanon war. It was also some ten days after Israel’s minister of justice was convicted of sexual assault while on duty, and a couple of weeks after Israel’s president – who holds a largely symbolic position – resigned temporarily following charges of rape and sexual misconduct. It was also the same day that the head of Israel’s tax authority resigned because of possible corruption charges. In the meantime, several other investigations are still pending, not least two or three directed at the Prime Minister himself, Ehud Olmert, concerning corruption and favoritism. And an appeal to the Supreme Court has already been filed against the minister of police’s choice for a new police chief – again, because of old charges of corruption of which the nominee had been acquitted only through a particularly narrow benefit of the doubt.
...

One of the corruption probes involving Ehud Omert just happens to involves charges of favoritism in the privatization of Bank Leumi while he was Minister of Finance.

Former Prime Minister Shimon Peres is also facing investigations over some campaign contributions from three foreign contributors, one of which includes Swiss business Bruce Rappaport. Mr. Rappaport also happens to have an interesting history with the Iran Contra, BCCI, and October Surprise affairs.

Continuing...

...
Do these events really presage the collapse of the Israeli system of governance and democracy? There certainly has never been such a deep crisis of leadership in the country that touts itself as the only democracy in the Middle East. The leader of the ruling parliamentary coalition, Avigdor Yitzhaki, said so publicly a few days ago. And the Minister of Education has suggested that all schools devote special classes to the "government crisis", so that children can speak out about what might well seem to them like a total collapse of all systems that control their lives. Suddenly the Palestinians and the Hizbullah, and even Iranian nukes, have taken a back seat: Israel does indeed seem in danger of imploding from within, at least as a viable democracy.
...

We're going to end this random walk through corrupt history with a couple more interesting links on the topic of the fascist elements in not only Israel's politics and a plug for a public radio fundraiser :-P.

The first link is to a one minute video clip by anti-fascist researcher Dave Emory on the topic of the fascist elements of Zionism. It's a excerpt from The First Refuge of a Scoundrel - The Relationship Between Fascism and Religion, a two hour talk on the topic of religion and fascism he recently gave. The video is available as part of the fund drive for WFMU, a non-commercial, freeform radio station broadcasting at 91.1 FM in Jersey City, NJ. If you tune in during the today (Tuesday, March 13), from 6-7 PM EST (which you can do online here), and make a $75 dollar donation to the station, you can a DVD of the talk thrown in as "swag". Yay!

And the second link is to another Dave Emory show from back in November of 1998, The Republican Party and International Fascism (audio here). It's a half hour show cover the GOP's very real history of working with fascists. It also discusses, ~18 minutes into the show, an interesting 1998 meeting of far-Rightists in Italy that include not only American far-Rightists, but Israeli far-Rightists. It's a useful reminder that, when we're talking about fascism and its history, we inevitably are talking about a larger global movement with cooperation that transcends borders and religions. Authoritarian thugishness, it appears, is a powerful unifying force.

By ftr23532@yahoo.com

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Will Congress continue pimping for the White House?

(Ben Heine © Cartoons)
---
08-03-07

Nothing seems to have changed under the Capitol’s dome. Last November’s election results, although producing a small majority for Democrats in the House – but leaving the Senate at the merci of a hawkish Likudian, Joe Lieberman – were not a mandate to institute change; maybe some light investigative opportunities to keep legislators busy and in the public eye, but definitely not change. Not on the mess in Iraq; or the one in Afghanistan; or on a foreign policy that has set the United States too often apart from the community of nations, putting a country once liked and respected in great disfavor.

If the 107th Congress proved to be a true bipartisan whoremonger for Bush’s White House back in October of 2002, the 108th and 109th congresses didn’t bring any form of redemption, remorse or sanity to the legislature in Washington; not even suggestions for the Decider to carry on his bad decisions more efficiently. And, to date, all appearances indicate that the 110th wears the same red, yellow and blue colors that the others did. A bright canary yellow for cowardice replacing the white – mythically ascribed for purity – that alternates with red in Old Glory.

But why would anyone expect anything else when 90 percent of the legislators in the 107th were renewing their vows in the 110th exercising what they apparently believe to be their birthright to life tenure in politics? Just in case anyone has forgotten and needs a cheat sheet, in American politics citizens may cast the ballots but it is money, at times combined with public apathy, which ends up electing politicians to office.

Americans’ confidence and pride in their government have always emanated from the trust imputed to just one thing: the existence of a system of checks and balances. That has been the source of reliable strength for the Republic, and without it the workability of the Constitution would be questionable at best. And that system of checks and balances has failed, clearly failed, leaving many of us to question whether such system can ever be made to work again in a political environment of self-perpetuation.

Our Republic’s form of government with its three divisions is not that much different from that of the other republic of two millennia before: Rome. But after what has happened to this nation under George W. Bush, one is tempted to conclude that maybe the Romans’ collegial system – requiring at least two people for every office – might have worked better for America. At least the Romans had two consuls as chief civil and military magistrates to run the show – and they weren’t beholden to any party or group – who only during times of extreme emergency would appoint a Dictator, a veritable commander-in-chief (with just 6 months tenure) to cope with the existing crisis. Recent history seems to indicate that if Congress continues relinquishing its responsibilities to the Executive; America could easily be electing dictators from now on with tenures of 4 years a pop. As we have recently done… twice!

Of course, we could resort to impeachment to get these dictators ousted. But we don’t. No better time than the present for Congress to prove to the nation that they are in control, respectful of the duties and responsibilities assigned to them in the Constitution. But since the citizenry at large is filled with apathy, or resigned to wait until next election, Congress prefers not to act – as if in solidarity with a spiritual brotherhood of politicians that keeps this corrupt duopoly playing musical chairs. Why rock the boat when Democrats and Republicans hold the monopoly of the nation’s politics?

What’s happening in Congress, or rather what is not happening in Congress, defies the most basic political sense. It’s not just Democrats in Congress who should be asking for the political heads of the malicious-duo, Bush and Cheney, but Republicans as well. It is not a political or ideological duel that is being fought; nothing that resembles right against left, conservatism against liberalism… it’s something far, far different from that. True fiscal conservatives and other traditionalists must be turning in their graves when they see their ideas and legacy being held hostage by an inept group of neocons whose objective is solely a redistribution of wealth from the working poor to the rich, doing so not just through unjust taxation but also war. A reality that comes home to roost: mixing money and politics, at the level reached in the United States, is a recipe for disaster.

There won’t be any punishment for this nation’s Scoundrel-in-Chief living in the White House or for his villainous consul-mentor. At least for now, Bush and Cheney appear to be safe from any possible impeachment by Congress… or any citizen-multitudes rushing after them with pitchforks. Americans have become civilized to the point of total indifference, absorbed by the apparent essence to their lives: consumerism.

Meantime Congress is already giving us a few candidates to the presidency for 2008, people who were derelict in their duties back in October 2002 when they shamelessly surrendered their votes and their souls giving their “ayes” on the Iraq war resolution to the most deceitful administration this nation has ever seen; people like:

Sen. Joseph R. “Joe” Biden, Jr. (D – Delaware)
Sen. Sam D. Brownback (R – Kansas)
Sen. John S. McCain, III (R – Arizona)
Sen. Hillary R. Clinton (D – New York)
Sen. Christopher J. “Chris” Dodd (D – Connecticut)
Rep. Duncan L. Hunter (R – California)
Rep. Thomas G. “Tom” Tancredo (R – Colorado)

The longer Bush remains in the White House the more convinced I am that it hasn’t been just Congress pimping for the president and his administration, but even those of us who knew better from the moment he was inaugurated but refused to set our speakers loud enough to really help make a difference... our voices drowned in our own courteous but misguided moderation.

Saturday, December 23, 2006

Could Bush Start Another War?

“If the king attacks Persia, he will destroy a great empire.” – Delphic Oracle

All the news is that despite growing antiwar sentiment among the public and the establishment, Bush has decided to reject the major recommendations of the Baker panel and continue to settle for nothing less than total “victory” in Iraq, that he has turned back to the dark heart of the War Party, the American Enterprise Institute, for a plan to win and that more troops and ships are headed to the region.

Everyone outside AEI seems to agree that the chances for his “victory” of a multiethnic, America-friendly, democratic Iraqi state have long since expired. The Baker panel avoided using the term at all. And as investigative reporter Robert Dreyfuss explained to me last week, the US is backing the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) death squad leaders because they are the only ones (besides some of the Kurds in the autonomous North) who want – need – the US to stay. This is hardly the “road to victory” as it has been defined by the President.

But Bush can’t stop now. He figures his legacy as a disgrace to America and all mankind can be postponed or perhaps somehow even reversed if he could have just a little more time.

Time for what? Could it be that Bush truly intends to carry out the full neoconservative program in the Middle East, complete with more regime changes?

Could spreading his most spectacular failure to Iran and Syria make Iraq seem merely a “catastrophic success“? Are even Bush and Cheney stupid enough to think an air war against Iran will accomplish anything other than forcing their withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, pushing their rebellious populace back into the arms of the Mullahs, driving the price of oil over $200 a barrel and beginning a brand new war in Iraq against the Iran-friendly Shia whom the U.S. has spent hundreds of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars installing in power?

Could Bush, whose approval ratings remain in the 30s, initiate an aggressive war without authorization from Congress? Could he claim that the authorization for the war in Iraq was all the authority he needed?

Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh seem to think so. On December 14th Democracy Now! replayed the audio of their October 16, 2006 appearance at the Ethical Culture Society.

They emphasize the role of the communist cult Mujahideen-e-Khalq – once Saddam’s loyal terrorists, now “ours” – in the early stages of war against Iran and the then-recent – and now recent again – news of U.S. Navy ships, including minesweepers, being sent to the Persian Gulf region. Ritter also explained that the American people have already accepted Bush’s false premise that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and that the U.S. must not allow it to be successful.

But, as Hersh reported in the New Yorker’s November issue, the CIA’s new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran says that they have no evidence at all of a secret weapons program. Indeed, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has had full access to Iran’s nuclear program, has reported all along that there is “no indication” that Iran has diverted nuclear technology to any other purpose beyond their declared and monitored electricity program, a program which they have an “inalienable right” to under the NPT.

According to Ritter and Hersh, the Israelis don’t have any more evidence than the U.S. does, and it does not matter. In the eyes of right-wing Likudnik crazies like Benjamin Netanyahu and his ex-communist, Israel-First, neocon buddies in the U.S., any nuclear technology in the hands of the Iranians is tantamount to a ready capacity to “wipe Israel off the map.” The fact that the ability to enrich uranium to the grade required to generate electricity (around 3.6% U-235) does not equal the ability to enrich it to weapons grade (well over 90% U-235) – especially in the presence of IAEA inspectors and video equipment – is irrelevant to them.

It has been reported, first by Philip Giraldi, then by Hersh, Larisa Alexandrovna and Col. Sam Gardiner (ret.), that Bush has considered using real nukes on Iran’s pretend ones. While it seems inconceivable, Iran’s Natanz facility is buried deep underground, and we know how concerned Bush is with getting things right the first time.

It seems the only way he can imagine to take one last shot at greatness is to compound his mistake by 1,000 times.

Perhaps the question is whether Israel will start a war in Syria as a back door to the expansion of America’s war to Iran, or will the U.S. simply fake another Gulf of Tonkin provocation in the Indian Ocean and hit Syria second?

Even if Iran did have nuclear weapons, it would still be none of America’s business. They do not have the rocket technology to deliver them here, nor would they be likely to share their prize with terrorists. Nuclear bombs all come with a “return address.” And let’s not forget that back in 2003, they offered to give the US everything.

Israel has at least 400 nuclear bombs, a fully capable conventional military and can protect itself just fine. They don’t need the U.S. for their defense, but for aggression against threats that do not really exist.

Even Robert Gates, our new secretary of “defense” admitted to Congress that the only reason Iran would want a nuke is that they are surrounded by powers with nukes.

Robert Parry reports that Bush, Blair and Olmert are already planning for more war in the new year. The Iranians seem to have waited too long to get their act together. If they had withdrawn from the NPT and started harvesting plutonium the way North Korea did, instead of throwing their books wide open to the UN and trying to go along, they’d have a nuclear deterrent by now.

Posted by Scott Comments (1)

Saturday, December 16, 2006

Steinitz estimates: US will attack Iran

buLikud MK states he is 'convinced United States will attack and save the world.' As for situation in Palestinian Authority, he clarifies that 'no elections will change nature of PA as a terrorist entity'
Anat Bereshkovsky

Knesset Member Yuval Steinitz (Likud) said Saturday that he believes the United States will not settle for sanctions and diplomatic moves, and will eventually attack Iran .

Condemnation

EU charges Iran with destabilizing Middle East / Reuters

Resolution slams Iran over nuclear program, threats towards Israel; condemns denial of Holocaust by Tehran
Full story

Speaking in a rally in the southern city of Be'er Sheva, Steinitz also referred to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' decision to move up the elections in the Palestinian Authority, saying that "no elections will be able to change the nature of the Palestinian Authority."

Steinitz, who serves as head of a joint committee of the Knesset and the US Congress, expressed his great hope that the US will attack Iran, saying he believes that "the US will attack Iran and hit it in order to thwart its nuclear ability, as the diplomatic activity has failed."

'Bush and Blair have a historical role'

Steinitz claims that the US is technically capable of bombing the nuclear reactor in Iran. He stressed that his estimation is based on his deep acquaintance with senior US Congress members and senators.

"I believe that the US will use a military operation to save the world," Steinitz added. "Bush and Blair have a historical role in dealing with the Iranian threat."

Referring to the Palestinian issue, MK Steinitz, who served in the past as chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, called on the government to launch a wide-scale military offensive in the Gaza Strip.

He also addressed Abbas' speech , and warned of developing high expectations.

"No elections will change the nature of the Palestinian Authority as a terrorist entity and a systematic agreement violator. Israel must disband the PA, at least in Judea and Samaria, as a preliminary move ahead of the future need to deal with the Iranian threat."

So Much for Inalienable Rights

December 16, 2006

by Gordon Prather

Two weeks ago, during his Senate confirmation hearings, nominee Robert Gates was asked if he believed the Iranians were trying to acquire a nuclear weapons capability.

Gates said he did.

He was then asked if he believed "the Iranians would consider using that nuclear weapons capability against the nation of Israel."

Gates said he didn’t. In fact, he believed the Iranians were seeking a nuclear weapons capability as a "deterrent." After all, Gates noted that –

"They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons: Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west and us in the Persian Gulf."

Notice that Gates was asked not about nuclear weapons, but about "nuclear weapons capability."

What’s the difference?

Well, to the Likudniks and their Congressional sycophants, there isn’t any.

But, as far as the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the Guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group are concerned, there is an enormous difference.

As an NPT signatory, Iran has an "inalienable right" to develop "without discrimination" the capability to enrich uranium – subject, of course, to an IAEA Safeguards Agreement, entered into for the exclusive purpose of verifying that no "source or special fissionable material" has been diverted to a military purpose.

Furthermore, the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China – as signatories to the NPT– have all undertaken to "facilitate" that development by Iran.

Nevertheless, despite at least a dozen quarterly reports by IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei that he could find no indication that Iran had ever diverted any source or special fissionable material to a military purpose, Bush and the Likudniks have managed to get the IAEA Board of Governors to repeatedly violate the IAEA Statute and the UN Security Council to repeatedly disregard the UN Charter, demanding that Iran give up its rights guaranteed by both the NPT and by the IAEA Statute.

Now, you might think that the Likudniks – and maybe even Bush and Bobby Gates – know something ElBaradei doesn’t know. That they are not complete idiots. That they don’t really consider an Iranian capability to enrich uranium in an IAEA Safeguarded facility to be tantamount to Iran having nuclear weapons.

But no, one of the more interesting revelations elicited by Seymour Hersh from Scott Ritter during their televised public discussion this past October of Ritter’s latest book Target Iran, was that Ritter had cultivated a close working relationship with Israeli intelligence analysts, beginning while a US Marine intelligence officer, assigned to the staff of General Norman Schwartzkopf during Operation Desert Storm, continuing through his seven years as Chief Inspector for the UN Commission on Arms Control in Iraq, even informing the books Ritter has written since resigning from UNSCOM.

After praising ElBaradei for having conducted a multi-year program of inspections of unprecedented scope and thoroughness, resulting in no evidence of undisclosed nuclear activity, much less a diversion of source or special fissionable materials, Ritter revealed that Israeli intelligence has also been unable – despite considerable use of on-the-ground "human intelligence" and analysis of spy-satellite images – to find any indication of a hidden Iranian nuclear program.

Nevertheless;

"Israel has drawn a red line that says, not only will they not tolerate a nuclear weapons program in Iran, they will not tolerate anything dealing with nuclear energy, especially enrichment, that could be used in a nuclear program.

"So, even if Iran is telling the truth – Iran says, 'We have no nuclear weapons program. We just want peaceful nuclear energy' – Israel says, 'So long as Iran has any enrichment capability, this constitutes a threat to Israel,' and they are pressuring the United States to take forceful action."

So, Bush and Gates and the Likudniks don’t know something about Iran’s nuclear programs that ElBaradei doesn’t know, that our intelligence community doesn’t know, that Congress doesn’t know.

Speaking of the Best Congress Money Can Buy, what were they doing while Bush-Bolton-Rice were corrupting the IAEA Board of Governors and emasculating the UN Security Council?

Well, busy passing the Iran Freedom and Support Act which, inter alia, declared it "should" be the policy of the United States not to bring into force an agreement for cooperation with the government of any country unless "either on its own initiative or pursuant to a binding decision of the United Nations Security Council, suspended all nuclear assistance to Iran and all transfers of advanced conventional weapons and missiles to Iran."

That law was aimed at Russia, an NPT signatory still attempting to honor its NPT commitments to Iran.

Then, in their final hours, the 109th Congress enacted the US-India Nuclear Cooperation Act, which, inter alia, declared it "shall" be the policy of the United States to

"Secure India's full and active participation in United States efforts to dissuade, isolate, and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel, and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction."

What if India is not assessed by the President to be fully and actively participating in such efforts?

He is to provide them a report setting out

"(I) the measures the United States Government has taken to secure India's full and active participation in such efforts;

"(II) the responses of the Government of India to such measures; and

"(III) the measures the United States Government plans to take in the coming year to secure India's full and active participation;"

As for the Likudniks, upon emerging from a meeting last week with Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert alluded once again to the possibility of Israeli military action against Iran, saying, "the people of Iran must understand that if they do not accept the request of the international community [to give up their inalienable rights], they're going to pay dearly."

Monday, December 11, 2006

Who Are the Real Friends of Israel?

December 10, 2006

Matthew Yglesias makes the obvious point from Leon Hadar: for his work at Camp David during his presidency, Jimmy Carter is one of the best friends Israel has ever had. By contrast, let me make the point that the writers for the New Republic--along with all the others who coquette with the annexationist fantasies of Likud, and tell Israeli politicians that occupation of the Golan Heights and settlers on the West Bank are a source of strength rather than weakness for Israel--well, you can call them many things, but you cannot truthfully call them real friends of Israel.

Here is Matt:

Matthew Yglesias / proudly eponymous since 2002: This week's Two Minute Hate seems destined to be directed at ex-president Jimmy Carter who's written a book called Palestine: Peace not Apartheid. I don't like the title, either, and, frankly, don't plan to read the book. Still, Leon Hadar (Via Jim Henley) seems to me to have the best overall take on this: "I'm not sure whether Carter doesn't like Israelis or hates Jews but from my perspective, he would go down in history as someone who made a huge contribution to Israel's security through his successful mediation of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty."

Quite so. Compare this to the strategic "thinking" of Carter-hater Martin Peretz: "Baker has already informed us of what a successful negotiation between Israel and Syria would mean: a return of the Golan Heights to Damascus. Why would this satisfy the Syrians? They launched their war against Israel when they possessed the Heights. It was theirs." By this "logic" of course, not only were Carter's efforts on behalf of peace between Israel and Egypt misguided, but the Camp David Accords must have been impossible. After all, Egypt went to war with Israel when it already had the Sinai Peninsula, so how could Egypt possibly agree to peace in exchange for getting the Sinai back? Indeed, by Peretz's line of reasoning it should be impossible, in general, for countries to stop fighting wars with each other -- France and Germany would just be doomed to an endless series of armed conflicts.

Saturday, December 9, 2006

Get Feith and Exit Iraq without Bush

09/12/2006 12:13:44 ã

By Ahmed Amr*

"They say that the killings and kidnappings are being carried out by men in police uniforms and with police vehicles but everybody in Baghdad knows that the killers and kidnappers are real policemen." Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari (quoted by Patrick Cockburn, The Independent 11/26/2006)

Paul Bremer to NewsWeek (2/9/2004}: "The two most popular things I've done since I've been here are the de-Baathication decree … and the disbanding of the Army."

Paul Bremer to USA TODAY four months later (6/17/2004}: "People say I disbanded the army. There was no army to disband. It didn't exist. It wasn't here."

As the sectarian bloodletting in Iraq intensifies, it is easy to lose track of the American policies that unleashed the carnage.

Even the anti-war movement seems to have accepted the conventional wisdom that the insurgency and the Shiite death squads attired in police uniforms were unfortunate and unpredictable byproducts of a noble neo-con project to establish a progressive western oriented state in a turbulent region.

The greatest acts of deception in this war of choice were not the WMD allegations or the canard that Saddam was behind the atrocities of 9/11. The bigger lie is that the United States was on an idealistic expedition to fight tyranny and spread the gospel of democracy.

Bringing on the insurgency

One can trace the emergence of the insurgency to Emperor Paul Bremer's arrival in Baghdad on May 12, 2003. The American pro-consul wasted no time in issuing his first two decrees - De-Baathification and disbanding the Iraqi army. Four days after arriving in Iraq, Bremer fired 30,000 senior Baath Party officials from the government. A few days later, he dissolved the army, putting more than 400,000 Iraqi officers and soldiers out on the street without pensions.

The conventional wisdom is that Bremer 'made a mistake' that eventually led to the birth of the insurgency in the Sunni Triangle. The pro-consul's first two edicts were correctly perceived as a frontal assault against the Sunni Arab minority and the response was predictable.

Bremer's marching orders came straight from Douglas Feith - the neo-con Pentagon wizard appointed by Rumsfeld to redesign post-war Iraq after sidelining Collin Powell and the State Department. The enduring myth that the United States had no post-war plan is bunk. The State Department's legion of experts spent months meticulously putting together reconstruction plans that were shelved because the authors were deemed to be 'Arabists.' The neo-con dictionary definition of an Arabist is a seasoned American diplomat with first hand experience in the Middle East who can't pass the pro-Israeli litmus test.

For the record, Douglas Feith was the same neo-con operative tasked with setting up the pre-war WMD intelligence manufacturing plant known as the Office of Special Plans. The mission of this rogue Pentagon 'intelligence' unit was to sideline the CIA and fabricate tall tales that eventually ended up as leaks on the front pages of The New York Times and The Washington Post - courtesy of Judith Miller and other Likudnik spin meisters.

Feith motivated by Likudnik faith

Feith's fingerprints are all over the Iraqi debacle. For all his troubles, General Tommy Franks nominated Feith as "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth."

In hindsight, it appears that General Franks overlooked Feith's biographical data. Had Franks taken the time to assess Feith's Likudnik affiliations - he might have reached an entirely different conclusion. If anything, Feith achieved a level of success beyond his wildest neo-con fantasies.

For background information on Feith, General Franks should have consulted Jim Lobe - a respected expert on the neo-conservative cabal that hijacked American foriegn policy after 9/11. One of Lobe's articles dating back to November 3, 2003 is a must read. "Loss of Feith in Douglas" sheds quite a bit of light on Feith's Likudnik Bona Fides. The article amounts to a detailed resume of the former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. Lobe paints a picture of a committed Zionist who can only be described as a radical Israel Firster with political views that conform to the extreme right of the Israeli political spectrum.

Douglas Feith's Likudnik Bona Fides
www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK07Ak03.html

What follows are some of the highlights from the Jim Lobe's article which documented Feith's long career as a Netenyahu Likudnik.

"A protege of Richard Perle, the former chairman of Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board (DPB) who stands at the center of the neo-conservative foreign policy network in Washington, Feith has long opposed territorial compromise by Israel. He was an outspoken foe of the Oslo process and even the Camp David peace agreement mediated by former president Jimmy Carter between Egypt and Israel. His former law partner, L Marc Zell, is a spokesman for the Jewish settlers' movement on the occupied West Bank."

"Also like Perle, Feith has long taken a strong interest in Israel and its security. His father, Dalck Feith, a philanthropist and major Republican contributor from Philadelphia, was active in the militantly Zionist youth movement Betar, the predecessor of Israel's Likud Party, in Poland before World War Two."

"Both father and son have been honored by the Zionist Organization of America, which, unlike other mainstream Jewish groups in the US, has consistently supported Likud positions and the settlement movement in the occupied territories and actively courted the Christian Right."

"Feith also served with Perle on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, a think tank that promotes military and strategic ties between the US and Israel."

"In 1996, he participated in a study group chaired by Perle and sponsored by a right-wing Jerusalem-based think tank that produced a report calling for incoming prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to build a strategic alliance with Turkey, Jordan and a new government in Iraq that would transform the balance of power in the Middle East in such a way that Israel could decisively resist pressure to trade "land for peace" with the Palestinians or Syria."

"In 1997, he published a lengthy article, "A Strategy for Israel", published in Commentary magazine, where Feith argued that Israel should repudiate the Oslo accords and move to re-occupy those parts of the West Bank and Gaza that had been transferred to the Palestinian Authority."

" Two years later, he and Perle signed an open letter to then-president Bill Clinton calling for Washington to work with Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress to oust Saddam Hussein."

"In May 2000, they signed a report calling for the US to be prepared to attack the Syria militarily unless Damascus failed to withdraw its troops from Lebanon."

Feith was faithful to his country - Israel

Feith's policy decisions cannot be divorced from his ideology. And his motives can only be deciphered in light of his long history as an agitator for the Israeli Lobby. Even the blind should be able to recognize Douglas Feith for what he is - a disciplined and committed Likudnik operative. In evaluating Feith's edicts - one has to think of the desired objectives of his mentors in Tel Aviv. Feith wanted what his country wanted. And his country was Israel.

Why the invasion of Iraq was good for Israel

And what exactly did Israel want? Israel would like nothing more than to see Iraq partitioned. It has a long history of supporting Kurdish separatists - if only the Iraqi variety. In deference to its strategic alliances with Ankara, Tel Aviv has an entirely different attitude towards Turkey's Kurdish rebels.

Sabotaging the Arab nationalist movement has always been a strategic goal of Zionism. For Feith's Israeli mentors, the outbreak of civil war and chaos in Iraq or any other Arab country is considered a good thing. The Likudnik obsession with the Baath party is rooted in Israel's fear of a resurgence of pro-Palestinian pan-Arab nationalism. Historically, the pan-Arabists gave the Palestinians safe havens in addition to financial, material and diplomatic support.

But that was history. In the real world, pan-Arabism continues to endure only in the minds of a few bureaucrats at the Arab League. Amr Mousa will probably go down in history as the last of the genuine pan-Arab Mohicans.

The Camp David Accord and Egypt's separate peace has already led to the disappearance of Nasserism from the political map of the region. That left Baghdad and Damascus as the last outposts of the pan-Arab nationalism.

In the case of Iraq, Saddam's token support for the Palestinians was calculated to shore up his regime's domestic legitimacy. Regardless, that was enough to put him on the Likudnik hit list. Old Israeli habits die hard and so it is that Tel Aviv continues to fight the ghost of a movement that no longer exists.

Against the backdrop of the Iraq war, Sharon and Olmert were granted ample space and time to systematically pulverize the Palestinians into slave-like submission. The goal was to get their leadership to accept an 'independent state' in Gaza and a few walled in mini-bantustans in the West Bank.

The conduct of American occupation troops in Iraq legitimized Israeli tactics. The use of torture, loose rules of engagement, scorched earth policies, collective punishment and the branding of insurgents as common criminals and terrorists were all Israeli standard operating procedures.

Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz played a pivotal role in selling these policies to the Pentagon. The neo-con insiders and their Likudnik collaborators in the mass media wanted to market the notion that America's occupation of Iraq and Israel's repression of the Palestinians were noble campaigns by two allies fighting in the same trench against a common enemy - the irrational demonic forces of 'Islamic terror.' The Palestinians were not fighting for their liberty - they were just acting out because they subscribed to a culture that breeds violence. In the same vein, Iraqi insurgents were not resisting the occupation of their country by foreign armies. They were just one huge Al-Qaeda cell operated by remote control from a cave in Afghanistan.

Neo-cons recycle old Israeli blue prints

Historical analogies are not always useful. But if one were to search for a conflict that had the same blue print as the war in Iraq and ended up with pretty much the same results - it would be the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

Both invasions were unprovoked unilateral acts of aggression. The pipe dream in Lebanon was that Israel would empower the Shiites in the south, 'liberate' them from the PLO and install a pro-Israeli government under Bashir Gemayel - the Philangist warlord. Eighteen years later, the Israelis withdrew in the middle of the night after losing a war of attrition against Hezbollah - an Iranian backed Shiite resistance movement that was created to resist Israeli occupation.

The thing about Likudniks is that they are intellectually inflexible ideologues mired in a fantasy world with doctored history and delusional expectations. If at first they don't succeed in Lebanon, they roll out the same worn out blue prints in Iraq two decades later and repeat the fiasco - this time with American blood and American treasure. And so it was that Feith and Wolfowitz set out on a long cakewalk in Mesopotamia to 'liberate' the Shia and Kurds and install Ahmed Chalabi as the leader of a pro-Israeli American client state in Baghdad.

Early rumors of government death squads

With the growing insurgency, Rumsfeld's initial assessment that the rebels were just a bunch of 'dead-enders' was discredited. The Bush administration and the neo-con priesthood scrambled to deal with the new realities. Writing in the New York Times (Nov. 16, 2003), Max Boot openly advocated the use of assassination teams modeled after the CIA's Phoenix project in Vietnam.

"We can still learn important lessons from that earlier war about how to deal with the insurgency. What proved most effective in Vietnam were not large conventional operations but targeted counterinsurgency programs. Four - known as CAP, Cords, Kit Carson Scouts and Phoenix - were particularly effective."

"Phoenix was a joint C.I.A.-South Vietnam effort to identify and eradicate Vietcong cadres in villages. Critics later charged the program with carrying out assassinations, and even William Colby acknowledged there were "excesses." Nevertheless, far more cadres were captured (33,000) or induced to defect under Phoenix (22,000) than were killed (26,000)."
"There is little doubt that if the United States had placed more emphasis on such programs, instead of the army's conventional strategy, it would have fared better in Vietnam."

Max Boot is no ordinary pundit - he is a certifiable neo-con who hangs his hat at the influential Council of Foreign Relations - one of the think tanks that marketed the war. It wasn't long before journalist Seymour Hersh was revealing that U.S. Army Special Forces were conducting "pre-emptive man hunting operations" targeted at former Ba'thists and other civilians suspected of supporting the insurgency.

On January 5, 2004, Julian Coman of the Telegraph filed the following report from Washington:

Nine months after the end of Saddam Hussein's regime and his feared intelligence force, Iraq is to get a secret police force again - courtesy of Washington.

The Bush Administration will fund the agency in its latest bid to root out the Baathist loyalists behind the insurgency in parts of Iraq. The force will cost up to $US3 billion ($A4 billion) over the next three years.

Its ranks will comprise Iraqi exile groups, Kurdish and Shiite forces - and former agents who are now working for the Americans. CIA officers in Baghdad will play a leading role in directing their operations.

A former US intelligence officer said: "If successfully set up, the group would work in tandem with American forces but would have its own structure and relative independence. It could be expected to be fairly ruthless in dealing with the remnants of Saddam."

Although officially banned by the ruling Coalition Provisional Authority, militia groups are already patrolling in Iraq, resulting in an increasing death toll of top former Ba'thists.

The US hopes to organize the various groups into one force with the local knowledge, motivation and authority to hunt down resistance fighters. According to Washington, the new agency could number 10,000. Initially, salaries will be paid by the CIA, which has 275 officers in Iraq. The force is intended to have a crucial role in post-Saddam Iraq.

"The presence of a powerful secret police ... will mean that the new Iraqi political regime will not stray outside the parameters that the US wants to set," said John Pike, an expert on classified military budgets at the Global Security organization. "To begin with, the new Iraqi government will reign but not rule."

Inviting SCIRI's Death Squads to the Interior Ministry

The death squads began infiltrating the security forces right under the eyes of Bremer and Feith. Thousands of hard core disciples of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution (SCIRI) in Iraq were ushered into the ranks of the Iraqi police and Special Forces. Many of their cadres had been trained and indoctrinated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Now, why would Feith set into motion an irreversible process that basically handed the security apparatus to Tehran's allies? Well, because, at the time, the neo-con crystal ball predicted a spontaneous Iranian uprising that would convert Iran into a carbon copy of Turkey - a country that has cordial relations with Tel Aviv. Apparently, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad hadn't shown up on Feith's radar screen.

It didn't take long for SCIRI's militias - the Badr brigades - to make their presence felt on the streets of Iraq. On Feb 3, 2004, David Enders of the Asia Times reported that "the police are increasingly reliant on other local groups to help them do their jobs. "The Badr troops often make arrests for us," said Colonel Karim Hussein "They are training to help us do our jobs."

The Road to Civil War

Two years ago, Ayatollah Abdelaziz al-Hakim, SCIRI's leader, publicly declared his intent to take over the police forces. James Hider of the London Times reported on this new development on January 12, 2005.

"An Iranian-backed Ayatollah tipped to become Iraq's first elected leader in decades said yesterday that he would carry out a purge of Iraq's intelligence and security structures if his party wins power. Asked if he planned a sweeping purge of the intelligence and security forces that the Americans built up piecemeal after the war, the Ayatollah, who once commanded Sciri's 10,000-strong militia, said: "For sure. If we want to improve the security situation. It's natural and it's one of our priorities." In their place, he said he would install "loyal Iraqis and the believers (in God), and those who believe in the process of change in Iraq."

"If he forms the government, that will be a disaster. He'll purge the army, purge the police and put his own men in it," said Ghassan al-Atiyyah, a secular Shia commentator, who is trying to build bridges with the Sunni community and defuse the uprising. "This is the road to civil war."

A strange thing happened when SCIRI emerged as the largest party in the Shia coalition that won the transitional government elections. Ayatollah Abdelaziz al-Hakim didn't emerge as the Prime Minister. That position went to Ibrahim Jaafari of the Daawa Party. Al-Hakim had his sights on a much more powerful position - the interior ministry. Sure enough, one of his aides - Bayan Jabr - was appointed as Interior Minister in April 2005.

Bayan Jabr wasted no time in making his mark. As Iraq's senior police officer - he started converting the ministry into the official residence of the death squads. By May, he had launched the purge promised by Al-Hakim.

"In May 2005, Shiite militia groups in Iraq began depositing corpses into the dumps of Baghdad. The victims, overwhelmingly Sunni, were typically handcuffed, their corpses showing signs of torture - broken skulls, burn marks, electric drill holes; by that October, the death toll attributed to such groups had reached 500." (Harper's Magazine - 08/06/2006.)

Jabr is the kind of thug who likes to get his hands dirty. The SCIRI operative who continues to serve as finance minister in Maliki's cabinet was personally involved in death squad activities.

A year ago, Solomon Moore of the Los Angeles Times painted a pretty graphic picture of the Shiite death squads in the Iraqi police force (11/29/2005). It was a long feature that gave a vivid and disturbing account of the reign of terror orchestrated by the militia infested Baghdad security forces. But perhaps the most alarming thing about the article was the allegation that Jabr had a direct hand in drawing up death lists.

"This month, U.S. forces raided a secret Interior Ministry detention facility in southern Baghdad operated by police intelligence officials linked to the Badr Brigade, a Shiite militia that has long-standing ties to Iran and to Iraq's leading Shiite political party. Inmates compiled a handwritten list of 18 detainees at the bunker who were allegedly tortured to death while in custody. The list was authenticated by a U.S. official and given to Justice Ministry authorities for investigation. It was later provided to The Times. The U.S. military is investigating whether police officers who worked at the secret prison were trained by American interrogation experts. An Aug. 18 police operations report addressed to Interior Minister Bayan Jabr, who has ties to the Badr militia, listed the names of 14 Sunni Arab men arrested during a predawn sweep in the Baghdad neighborhood of Iskaan. Six weeks later, their bodies were discovered near the Iranian border, badly decomposed. All of the corpses showed signs of torture, and each still wore handcuffs and had been shot three times in the back of the head, Baghdad morgue officials said."

Out Sourcing Torture to Bayan Jabr and SCIRI

After Abu Ghraib, the Bush administration apparently decided to outsource torture to Bayan Jabr's goons. It was a natural extension of the administrations 'rendition' policies.

Jeffrey Fleishman filed this report on June 19, 2005. "The public war on the Iraqi insurgency has led to an atmosphere of hidden brutalities, including abuse and torture, carried out against detainees by the nation's special security forces, according to defense lawyers, international organizations and Iraq's Ministry of Human Rights.

Up to 60% of the estimated 12,000 detainees in the country's prisons and military compounds face intimidation, beatings or torture that leads to broken bones and sometimes death, said Saad Sultan, head of a board overseeing the treatment of prisoners at the Human Rights Ministry. He added that police and security forces attached to the Interior Ministry are responsible for most abuses.

The units have used tactics reminiscent of Saddam Hussein's secret intelligence squads, according to the ministry and independent human rights groups and lawyers, who have cataloged abuses.

"We've documented a lot of torture cases," said Sultan, whose committee is pushing for wider access to Iraqi-run prisons across the nation. "There are beatings, punching, electric shocks to the body, including sensitive areas, hanging prisoners upside down and beating them and dragging them on the ground…. Many police officers come from a culture of torture from their experiences over the last 35 years. Most of them worked during Saddam's regime." (The Times 6/19/2005)

New and Improved Canards

Now that we have put behind us the WMD canards and Iraq's non-existent links to the atrocities of 9/11 - the Bush administration and its mass media collaborators are marketing new and improved lies.

The new tall tale is that we went to Iraq on a noble mission to spread the blessings of democracy in the region. And that the democratically elected Prime Minister - Nouri Al-Maliki - is being subverted by rouge death squads and the insurgents. There is only one problem with this scenario - Maliki is the defacto leader of the death squads. He's quite happy to have the Marines engaging the insurgents in Ramadi while his security forces and allied militias go about the nasty business of ethnically cleansing Baghdad.

Fully two years ago, there was more than enough evidence to suggest that the Bush administration was complicit in establishing and nurturing death squads. Long after the death squads appeared on the scene - outfitted in their official issue police uniforms - American advisers continued to equip, train and provide logistical support to the Iranian trained militants who had infiltrated the security forces.

It's hard to imagine that the folks in the Pentagon and the CIA failed to notice the open collaboration of the Iraqi security forces with the death squads. The history of this dark chapter in the American occupation of Iraq is slowly coming to light thanks to folks like Seymour Hersch and Kim Sengupta. While Hersch's initial accounts were met by denial, The Pentagon no longer bothers disputing articles like one by Sengupta that appeared in The Independent on 10/31/2006.

"This is a shadowy struggle, which involves tortured prisoners huddled in dungeons, murder victims mutilated with knives and electric drills, and distraught families searching for relations who have been "disappeared." Iraq's savage sectarian war is now regarded as a greater obstacle to any semblance of peace returning than the insurgency. Yet, ironically, the death squads are the result of US policy. At the beginning of last year, with no end to the Sunni insurgency in sight, the Pentagon was reported to have decided to train Shia and Kurdish fighters to carry out "irregular missions." The policy, exposed in the US media, was called the "Salvador Option" after the American-backed counter-insurgency in Latin America more than 20 years ago, which led to 70,000 deaths and countless instances of human rights abuse."

The death squads are an instrument. The goal is partition.

Israel and its neo-con operatives at the Pentagon were not the only forces working towards partition. The Kurds wanted it and Al-Hakim and SCIRI are sparing no effort to achieve the same goal.

But there was always one major obstacle that stood in the way of partition. It was called Baghdad. The Iraqi capital is home to one of every four Iraqis. Its seven million residents are a mix of Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and others. Before the war, it was a secular city where Shiites and Sunnis lived in relative harmony as evidenced by the high percentage of mixed marriages and mixed neighborhoods. It was the kind of place where it was considered poor manners to ask another person's sect.

To partition Iraq - one must first partition Baghdad. What appears to be random tit-for-tat violence is actually part of a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing. The greatest mass migration in the modern history of the Middle East is underway. Over a million Iraqis have left the countries to seek refuge in Jordan, Syria and elsewhere. They include a high percentage of the crème de la crème of Iraq's professional class.

According to the United Nations, one hundred thousands Iraqi refugees are abandoning the country every month. A disproportionate number are Iraqi Sunnis and Iraqi Christians.

But there is another great exodus going on - a million plus Iraqis have been internally displaced. In Baghdad, the Sunnis are seeking safe haven west of the Tigris and the Shiites are drifting to the east bank of the river. Sadr City is operating as an independent theocracy under the rule of the Al Mahdi army. Other mixed cities like Kirkuk, Mosul and Baqouba are also experiencing ethnic cleansing campaigns.

The erosion of American influence in Iraq

As the Iraqi civil war has evolved, the ability of the Bush administration to control the course of events has steadily eroded. That was probably the major reason for going through the motions of 'restoring sovereignty' to the Iraqi government. By discarding the "occupation" label - the United States absolved itself of the legal obligation to provide security for the citizens of its Iraqi colony.

The United States military began withdrawing from Iraq two years ago. The majority of American troops never leave their fortified bases. And the primary mission of the troops in Iraq is force protection. Bush and Rumsfeld have publicly declared that they have no intention of intervening in a civil war that they refuse to acknowledge even exists.

So why continue deploying 150,000 military personnel at a cost of two billion dollars a week? Because Bush and his collaborators in both parties can't figure a face saving way to reach the exit door. Just today, he was still blaming all his troubles on Al Qaeda - a force that didn't exist in Iraq before the invasion.

Leaving Iraq under the control of a government run by the leaders of the same Iranian trained militias that operate the death squads also poses a challenge. Partition or no partition - Iran will emerge as the dominant force in the region.

The Gulf monarchs who actively backed and facilitated the neo-con inspired invasion are visibly shaken by the results of their folly. No one has ever accused the Machiavellian custodians of the oil plantations of being the brightest bulbs in the room.

Feith and Wolfowitz are long gone. No matter - the damage they intended to inflict on Iraq is done. They are definitely entitled to hang up the 'mission accomplished' sign. Their Prime Minister - Ehud Olmert - is obviously satisfied with the results. During his official visit to the United States on November 13th, he thanked Bush for the Mess on Potamia. "We in the Middle East have followed the American policy in Iraq for a long time, and we are very much impressed and encouraged by the stability which the great operation of America in Iraq brought to the Middle East."

Bush also had kind words for Olmert. "The whole central thrust of our discussions was based upon our understanding that we're involved in an ideological struggle between extremists and radicals versus people who just simply want to live in peace." Just a few months ago, Olmert and Bush teamed up to inflict a whole bunch of peace on Lebanon.

Exiting Iraq without Bush

Where Bush goes from here is anybody's guess. This empty shell of a man is susceptible to the last idea whispered in his ear - so long as it conforms to his shallow understanding of a fantasy world that exists only in his imagination. His ignorance and ineptitude are dwarfed only by his ego. We have an extremist in the White House who, after six years of neo-con indoctrination, is incapable of making rational judgments. The president is still immersed in delusions about leading victory parades down Pennsylvania Avenue. He is willing to expend whatever amount of blood and treasure necessary to leave Iraq in the lap of the next occupant of the White House.

The quickest way out of Iraq is impeachment. Elizabeth de la Vega has just published a book titled "United States v. George W. Bush et al." The former federal prosecutor is an expert at trying fraud cases. Read her book and you will walk away convinced that she has a closed and shut case proving that Bush and Cheney committed fraud against the American people to launch this war of choice.

After reading the book, don't put it away. Walk it down to your congressional representative and ask them for a book report. Better yet, get your book club to read the book and take your pals along for a visit to your Senator.

While you're waiting for the impeachment hearings, have the Senate intelligence committee resume its investigation of Douglas Feith. The pre-election Republican dominated committee has already blocked that probe for over a year. Now that the Democrats are in control, let's see if Hillary Clinton is interested in the truth before she invades the White House with her own hand picked team of neo-cons.

In the meantime, follow this link and see why Elizabeth de la Vega is about to rock America by blasting Bush et al out of the White House:

Bringing Bush to Court by Elizabeth de la Vega
www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=142875

* Ahmed Amr is the editor of NileMedia.com