Showing posts with label Pentagon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pentagon. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Longer Iraq Tours Good for "Army Stress," Pentagon Says

You know U.S. Central Command is nuts now, right?


Related
US Lieutenant colonel charged with aiding the enemy

---

Longer Iraq Tours Good for "Army Stress," Pentagon Says

You have got to be kidding me. Check out this pure-propaganda pronouncement, from the Pentagon's official news organ, the "American Forces Press Service":

Soldier_load

Extended Deployments Should Lessen Army Stress, Commander Says
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 24, 2007 – Extended overseas deployments affecting soldiers serving in Afghanistan and other locales overseen by U.S. Central Command should help to alleviate the stress on the Army, a senior U.S. officer in Afghanistan told Pentagon reporters today.

I’m absolutely confident that that’s going to work and that’ll manage the pressure and the stress on the force,” Army Col. Martin Schweitzer, commander of the 82nd Airborne Division’s 4th Brigade Combat Team, said during a satellite-carried news conference.

All active U.S. Army units already operating within U.S. Central Command’s area of responsibility, including Afghanistan, Iraq and the Horn of Africa, or en route there “will deploy for not more than 15 months and return home for not less than 12 months,” Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced April 11 at a Pentagon news conference.

The change automatically increased the length of soldiers’ overseas tours in those areas from 12 to 15 months...

The 15-month deployments are needed to ensure that the Army retains the capacity to sustain the deployed force, Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, commander of Multinational Corps Iraq, said April 13 from Baghdad during a teleconference with Pentagon reporters.

The tour extensions will provide more predictability and stability for soldiers and their families, Odierno said, noting the policy “will ensure 12 months at home station between rotations.”

Schweitzer acknowledged difficulty in measuring how the extended deployment affects individual soldiers under his command. However, he expressed strong support for the personnel decisions made by senior defense department and Army leaders.

The Pentagon’s civilian and military leaders “put a lot of rigor and analytical analysis into this (tour extension) to determine what is best for the service and what is sustainable,” Schweitzer said.
(emphasis mine)

Yeah, yeah. Water is dry, ice is warm, and up is down, too. This is entering into "Baghdad Bob" territory, folks. Seriously.

There are two possible interpretations of "Army stress" you could tease out of this pronouncement. The idea that longer tours will help with either is just silly.

This first is that longer tours will somehow ease pressures on the the service, institutionally. Traditionally, the Army has tried to give its troops two years at home for every year in combat. Which means deployed units should only make up about a third of the force; the other two-thirds should be at rest or in training. But with the Iraq war dragging on so long, that hasn't been possible. "Today half the Army's 43 combat brigades are deployed overseas, with the remainder recovering from their latest deployment or preparing for the next one," Time recently reported. Now, you're telling me that more time in Iraq somehow help correct that imbalance? That doesn't even pass the laugh test.

"Army stress" could also be interpreted as the burdens that soldiers and their families face, as they head off to war, again and again. That's the kind of stress Gen. Odierno seems to imply will be helped by soldiers spending an extra three months in a warzone. Again, that's a downright laughable position to take. As Phil Carter, an Iraq vet, recently noted:

There's a finite limit to the amount of time that men and women can withstand combat. British historian Richard Holmes pegged this figure at approximately 60 days of sustained combat. In Iraq, we often wondered what our finite limit was, given the stresses of our advisory mission and the frequent attacks on our compound in downtown Baqubah. You can... only... hit so many improvised explosive devices, before you burn out and need to go home.


(High five: PC)

Pentagon 'to End' Talon Data-Gathering Program

Surrre. A new name somewheres else and the basteds are back in biz.
---
Pentagon to End Talon Data-Gathering Program

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 25, 2007; A10

Less than two weeks after being sworn in as undersecretary of defense for intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr. is moving to end the controversial Talon electronic data program, which collected and circulated unverified reports about people and organizations that allegedly threaten Defense Department facilities.

Clapper, a former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, "has assessed the results of the Talon program and does not believe they merit continuing the program as currently constituted, particularly in light of its image in Congress and the media," according to a statement released in his name yesterday by a Pentagon spokesman.

Talon, launched in 2003 with an eye toward Sept. 11, 2001, came under public scrutiny in December 2005 with the disclosure that it had collected data on anti-military protesters and peaceful demonstrators. More recently, the American Civil Liberties Union released an internal Pentagon report showing that, as of 18 months ago, Talon had about 13,000 entries, of which 2,821 involved reports on U.S. citizens.

The Talon system was part of the Defense Department's growing effort under then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Clapper's predecessor, Stephen A. Cambone, to gather intelligence within the United States, which officials at that time argued was imperative as they worked to detect and prevent potentially catastrophic terrorist assaults.

The Clapper statement says that the Defense Department must continue "to document and assess potential threats to Defense Department resources" but that any new system, unlike Talon, "must lay to rest the distrust and concern about the department's commitment to civil rights."

The development was first reported by Reuters yesterday.

In answer to questions before his confirmation hearing, Clapper, who has worked for 43 years within military intelligence, said: "The history of the intelligence community is replete with instances of abuse of civil liberties -- well intended, but abuse nonetheless." He said it is "important that the proper balance be struck between the counterintelligence mission, on one hand, and the protection of civil liberties, on the other."

Talon -- which stands for Threat and Local Observation Notices -- is operated under the direction of the Counterintelligence Field Activity, which was established in September 2002 by then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz. CIFA was originally charged with coordinating policy and overseeing the domestic counterintelligence activities of Pentagon agencies and the armed forces.

The agency's size and budget are classified, but congressional sources have said that CIFA had spent more than $1 billion through last October. One counterintelligence official at that time estimated that CIFA had 400 full-time employees and 800 to 900 contractors working for it.

Last August, CIFA Director David A. Burtt II and his top deputy, Joseph Hefferon, resigned in the wake of a scandal involving CIFA contracts that went to MZM Inc., a company run by Mitchell J. Wade. Wade pleaded guilty in February 2006 to conspiring to bribe then-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif).

In written responses to questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing in December, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates pledged to look "in greater detail" at CIFA's activities.

Jessica Lynch decries US 'lies': Deliberate acts of deceit

Related
'Little girl Rambo' decries US propaganda
Initial reports also suggested that Ms Lynch had been abused after she came round in the hospital. She said the reports were lies: she had been treated well and the Iraqis had tried to return her to US forces.
---
Pat Tillman Deliberate acts of deceit
Pat Tillman's brother on the manipulation of his death.
Jessica Lynch decries US 'lies'

Monday, April 23, 2007

Is George W. Bush Planning To Trigger Apocalyptic War ?

April 23, 2007

By Bruce Wilson
talk2action@earthlink.net

Given that neoconservatives close to the Bush Administration have articulated visions for the Middle East that involve the replacement of numerous existing governments in the regions, not to mention the replacement of the atrocious North Korean regime, how could we distinguish, in practice, that plan in action from moves to bring on the apocalypse ? The two projects would tend to look quite similar. Both would involve increasingly expanded theaters of war : maximal mayhem.

IN fact, some prominent neoconservatives have stated their desire for maximal mayhem, maximal war:


"One can only hope that we turn the region [the Middle East] into a cauldron [of war], and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today."
-Michael Ledeen

Is George W. Bush a real Christian ? Is it just a manipulative act ? This post considers evidence that George W. Bush has genuine religious belief and, in fact, believes that the Apocalypse is immanent... even that he might have a divine mission to bring it on.

Yesterday I did a story on the heavy Evangelical penetration of the US military. The concern wasn't about Evangelicals but, rather, religious coercion in the military and troubling questions Weinstein has raised about possible compromises in the US military's chain of command.

Reading this post, please bear in mind that belief, or the absence of belief, is extremely difficult to demonstrate although modern MRI brain imaging techniques can demonstrate activity, or the lack of that, in areas of the brain associated with religious belief. But it is unlikely George W. Bush would submit to such scrutiny, and so we must consider proxy evidence.

If you're concerned about possible war with Iran, Wes Clark is too - you can sign his petition and get a free button ]

"The classical pattern of apocalypse, comprising in its active form, an initial phase of savage destruction followed by a phase of messianic rebirth, can be recognized in individual psychosis and in the Nazi type of destruction, persecution and virtual suicide." - Mortimer Ostow, "The Psychodynamics of Apocalyptic: Discussion of Papers on Identification and the Nazi Phenomenon," International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1986

"God wants me to be President." - George W. Bush, 19 January 1999

[UPDATE: Some critics of this post have objected that there are few, if any, apocalyptic Christian Zionists within the Bush Administration. That point, even if correct, does not negate the impact of beliefs George W. Bush might hold. Further, neoconservatives widely held to have had considerable influence, within the Bush administration and in propelling the US towards war with Iraq, talk in terms eerily similar to those of apocalyptic Christian Zionism. Much neoconservative rhetoric is in fact indistinguishable from the rhetoric of apocalyptic Christian Zionists:

Neoconservatives For Maximal War

"[Richard] Perle told journalist John Pilger in 2002 that "if we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war ... our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

"Israel is part of a global war, the war of radical Islam against civilization. Right now Israel is doing the work of the rest of the civilized world by taking on the terrorists. It is not only for Israel's sake that we must get the facts out -- it is for ourselves, America, for every free country in the world, and for civilization itself." - David Horowitz


"One can only hope that we turn the region [the Middle East] into a cauldron [of war], and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today."
-Michael Ledeen

"I think an explosion is long overdue and turning the whole region into a cauldron [of war] is a necessary step toward reforming it." - Mark Steyn

"Norm Podhoretz ranks among the most prominent American editors of the 20th century. And he's doing pretty well in the 21st. (Laughter.) Never a man to tailor his opinions to please others, Mr. Podhoretz has always written and spoken with directness and honesty. Sometimes speaking the truth has carried a cost. Yet, over the years, he has only gained in stature among his fellow writers and thinkers. Today we pay tribute to this fierce intellectual man [sic] and his fine writing and his great love for our country." - George W. Bush, presenting the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Podhoretz in June of 2004

"God willing, Judgment Day is coming to the Middle East." -Michael Ledeen

"Prof Ledeen is...believed to have the ear of the White House's current Chief of Staff Karl Rove, and has regular conversations with him. ...His view on the war on terror is clear, he said: 'Iraq is just one battle in a larger war, bringing down the regime in Iran is the central act...' "
-BBC News

"Whether or not the White House listens, it seems that they’ve listened to a lot of things about Iran, that I will say. I mean, some of the language and some of the speech is very familiar to me, and really reflects the sort of thing that I’ve been pushing for." - Ledeen, April 2003

"The regime must go." - [Richard] Perle and [David] Frum, on Iran

"All of Korea will be united in liberty." - Perle and Frum, on North Korea

"We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington." - Perle and Frum, on Europe

This post concerns the possibility that George W. Bush holds apocalyptic religious views and believes God has commanded him to attack Iran in order to bring on the Apocalypse.

"It was in his first campaign for governor that George W. began to preach the gospel according to Bush. He literally gave sermons in Houston's mega-churches, laying the blame for America's "failed culture" on the excesses of his generation in the 60s. "The culture of my generation, our generation, has clearly said, ‘If it feels good, do it, and be sure to blame somebody else if you have a problem.'" " - Gail Sheehey, Vanity Fair story on George W. Bush's religious beliefs.

When I woke this morning and made a pot of coffee, the sun was already up, cresting the hill behind my house amidst a din of birds and a riotous explosion, sudden and exuberant, of Spring. It was beautiful, and I think that's why I chose to wrote this now ; so that, in the words of Richard Brautigan's final book, ...The Wind Won't Blow It All Away.

***

About a month ago, a team of Japanese journalists visited Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, to do a story on Weinstein and his fight against religious coercion in the US military. The journalists told Weinstein they saw a pattern, now in the US, of religious militarism very similar to that which had arisen in Japan prior to World war Two.

"...a short video on faith and diplomacy made in the aftermath of September 11,2001, by Christian Embassy, a behind-the-scenes ministry for government and military elites. It almost seems to endorse deliberate negligence of duty, Dan Cooper, an undersecretary of veterans' affairs, announces that his weekly prayer sessions are "more important than doing the job." Major General Jack Catton says that he sees his position as an adviser to the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a "wonderful opportunity" to evangelize men and women setting defense policy. "My first priority is my faith," he says. "I think it's a huge impact.... You have many men and women who are seeking God's counsel and wisdom as they advise the Chairman [of the Joint Chiefs] and the Secretary of Defense." Brigadier General Bob Caslen puts it in sensual terms: "We're the aroma of Jesus Christ." There's a joyous disregard for democracy in these sentiments, for its demands and its compromises, that in its darkest manifestation becomes the overlooked piety at the heart of the old logic of Vietnam, lately applied to Iraq: In order to save the village, we must destroy it.
Weinstein, a former Air Force lawyer and Reagan White House counsel, saw not just some disturbing theology, but a potential violation of military regulations regarding separation of church and state." - Jeff Sharlet, Jeff Sharlet - Ten Things I Learned from the Pentagon's Prayer Team ( emphases mine )

War, especially religious war, is not a glorious affair. Images in this story are of the outcomes of real war on real humans. Please be advised.

drawing of HiroshimaAlso, a few days ago, as you've probably heard, US Senator John McCain sang "Bomb Iran, Bomb Bomb Bomb" to the tune of the Beach Boys' hit "Barbara Ann", before an audience of hundreds at a VFW hall.

Back in April 2006, John McCain said, on "Meet The Press", to Tim Russert, that war with Iran could lead to "Armageddon". Now, McCain's singing about bombing that country as if it were some sort of joke. GOP House Minority Whip Roy Blunt Jr. flew out to Texas, early in 2007, to meet privately with John Hagee as well. The Apocalypse seems to be a popular subject these days in the GOP.

To the right is a picture, by a survivor of the bombing, of victims of the Hiroshima nuclear blast.

***

( image, right: skulls of Hiroshima victims )

Over the course of the last few months, I've been studying what George W. Bush may believe, and what people who are accorded as having been major religious influences on Bush say they believe.

Almost to a man, and they have all been men, those who are held to have shaped George W. Bush's religious beliefs have been apocalyptic Christian Zionists. George Bush speaks in the idiom of Christian apocalyptic premillenial dispensationalism, in common parlance the language of the end-times, of the coming Apocalypse, Rapture, and Armageddon. "Madman" theory does not suffice, from all that I can tell, to explain George W. Bush's numerous statements, that he speaks to God, is on a mission from God, that he is part of a divine plan.

By most evidence, George W. Bush appears to hold a personal, messianic belief that he, personally, must usher in the Apocalypse. And, he might just be able, as the last gasp of his dying presidency, to pull it off. In 2004, David Domke and Kevin Coe did a study of presidential language and come to the troubling conclusion - George W. Bush's language is very different from language used by past presidents:

( image - from archival footage of "The Rape Of Nanking" )

"The religious outlook of George W. Bush has been the focus of recent stories by several major news media. In these pieces White House officials and allies consistently have made the case that Bush’s faith and language are no different from past presidents. In the words of the Rev. Richard Neuhaus in The Washington Post, "This is so conventionally Christian piety and Christian faith" that Bush’s faith is "as American as apple pie."

That simply is not so. Bush’s fusion of faith and politics is anything but conventional for the presidency.

The key difference is this: Presidents since Franklin Roosevelt have spoken as petitioners of God, seeking blessing and guidance; this president positions himself as a prophet, issuing declarations of divine desires for the nation and world. Most fundamentally, Bush’s language suggests that he speaks not only of God and to God, but also for God. Among modern presidents, only Ronald Reagan has spoken in a similar manner -- and he did so far less frequently than has Bush." - Published in The Revealer October 11, 2004. ( David Domke is an associate professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Washington. He is the author of God Willing? Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the "War on Terror," and the Echoing Press (Pluto Press, 2004). Kevin Coe is a doctoral student in the Department of Speech Communication at the University of Illinois. )

George W. Bush, at a public appearance Thursday, laid it out for all to see and this should come as no surprise:

As the Republican National Committee reports on its website, President Bush has declared this April 19, 2007, that his "faith" and his family come first, while George W. Bush's loyalty to the United States comes last. ( thanks to Universal Health for the tip )

I wish I was traveling here with Laura. The best thing about my family is my wife. (Applause.) She is a great First Lady. I know that sounds not very objective, but that's how I feel. And she's also patient. Putting up with me requires a lot of patience. But she sends her best; she's in New Orleans today.


And I will tell you, one reason -- this may sound counterintuitive, but a good marriage is really good after serving together in Washington, D.C. It's been an amazing experience to be a husband and then a dad as President of the United States. I emphasize, that is the priority for me as the President. It's my faith, my family, and my country"

Faith, Family, then Country ?

Bush's declaration of presidential loyalty seems to run directly counter to the oath Bush, and all US presidents, have taken upon entering presidential office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Am I making too much of this ?

Let's look at a recent flap concerning US Representative Keith Ellison's Islamic religious. Critics claimed that Ellison could not be trusted to honor his oath of office because some Islamicists say things like this:

Secularists in the West will agree with this, then they will point out that under Islamic law, people are not all equal. No non-Muslim, for example, could become the president. Well, in response to that fact, in turn, secularism is no different. No Muslim could become president in a secular regime, for in order to pledge loyalty to the constitution, a Muslim would have to abandon part of his belief and embrace the belief of secularism — which is practically another religion. For Muslims, the word 'religion' does not only refer to a collection of beliefs and rituals, it refers to a way of life which includes all values, behaviors, and details of living. ( Dr. Jaafar Sheikh Idris )

Indications are good that, for George W. Bush, religious belief trumps Bush's responsibility to American people who hold religious and philosophical beliefs that differ from his. Signs are strong that Bush wants Apocalypse and that, even though a large percent of American does not wish for Apocalypse, George W. Bush just doesn't care. If he has the power to bring it on, that's that ; he'll do it and damn us all to the hell on Earth he feels God wants him to set in motion.

Let me turn to Jeff Sharlet, to frame the backdrop to all of this:

John Hagee is likely one of religious leaders who helped shape Goerge W. Bush's religious beliefs. Until last Wednesday, John Hagee's "Apocalypse Lobby" website featured an image, of Jerusalem's Wailing wall and the Temple Mount, from which the 3rd Holiest Site in Islam had been airbrushed out. As a result of my blogging, it seems, CUFI last Wednesday replaced its website logo image with another image in which the Haram el-Sharif was visible. A number of observers considered the original, airbrushed CUFI logo image to be wildly provocative to the Islamic world.

Texas Megachurch Pastor John HageeIn a recent Charisma Magazine issue John Hagee, in a piece entitled "The Coming Holy War", wrote : "Israel and America must confront Iran's nuclear ability and willingness to destroy Israel with nuclear weapons."


On July 19, 2006, at a CUFI sponsored Washington DC event called "A Night to Honor Israel", with GOP Party head Ken Mehlman and US GOP Senators Sam Brownback and Rick Santorum ( President George W. Bush sent recorded greetings to the event ) , Pastor John Hagee declared :


"The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West... a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation [...] and [the] Second Coming of Christ."


Hagee's beliefs are actually part of mainstream Christian Zionist thought, which tends to hold that, after Christians are "Raptured" bodily up to heaven, most Jews ( 2/3 to be precise ) will die in a subsequent terrible conflict centered around Israel.

Fundamentalism is here, and even provided we can squeak by the Apocalypse we're going to have to learn to deal with it. As Jeff Sharlet writes:

"We keep trying to explain away American fundamentalism. Those of us not engaged personally or emotionally in the biggest political and cultural movement of our times—those on the sidelines of history—keep trying to come up with theories with which to discredit the evident allure of this punishing yet oddly comforting idea of a deity, this strange god. His invisible hand is everywhere, say His citizen-theologians, caressing and fixing every outcome: Little League games, job searches, test scores, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, the success or failure of terrorist attacks (also known as "signs"), victory or defeat in battle, at the ballot box, in bed.... A divine love that speaks through hurricanes. Who would worship such a god? His followers must be dupes, or saps, or fools, their faith illiterate, insane, or misinformed, their strength fleeting, hollow, an aberration. A burp in American history. An unpleasant odor that will pass.

We don’t like to consider the possibility that they are not newcomers to power but returnees, that the revivals that have been sweeping America with generational regularity since its inception are not flare-ups but the natural temperature of the nation...

The Christian nation of which the movement dreams, a government of those chosen by God but democratically elected by a people who freely accept His will as their own, is a far country. The nation they seek does not, at the moment, exist; perhaps it could in the future. More important to fundamentalism is the belief that it did exist in the American past, not in the history we learn in public school and from PBS and in newsmagazine cover stories on the Founders but in another story, one more biblical, one more mythic and more true. Secularism hides this story, killed the Christian nation, and tried to dispose of the body. Fundamentalism wants to resurrect it, and doing so requires revision: fundamentalists, looking backward, see a different history, remade in the image of the seductive but strict logic of a prime mover that sets things in motion. The cause behind every effect, says fundamentalist science, is God. Even the inexorable facts of math are subject to His decree, as explained in homeschooling texts such as Mathematics: Is God Silent? Two plus two is four because God says so. If He chose, it could just as easily be five. ( Jeff Sharlet, from Through a Glass Darkly, Harpers Magazine, December 2006 )

What does George W. Bush Believe ?

What does George W. Bush believe ? And, given the embattled nature of the Bush Administration, does it even matter ? Isn't Bush a lame duck president ? Hasn't the tide of political cronyism and religious zealotry that swept in as the presidency of George W. Bush crested at last ? With the return of the Democrats in force to Congress, to control the House of Representatives and the Senate, haven't we witnessed, at long last, the crest of the wave, the high water mark of the Bush Administration's proclivity for packing the federal bureaucacy with religious ideologues ?

"While it is well-known that George W. Bush presents himself as devoutly Christian, and he is widely considered beholden to the fundamentalists who are at least a third of the U.S. population and the GOP’s core voting base, whether or not he is a dispensationalist has emerged as one the administration’s most closely held secrets. The White House even refuses to say if the president has read the Left Behind books.

Among evangelicals, though, there is a widespread conviction that Bush shares the End Times vision and has been divinely appointed to lead the nation. ( from Glenn Weiser's What Does The President Believe ? )


(video clip: George W. Bush is known to have frequented, as Governor of Texas, John Hagee's Cornerstone Baptist Church. The video clip is set to a sermon, by Hagee, alleging a conspiracy of "international banking" interests to create a sinister, satanic "New World Order" through the United Nations)

Why have we seen, in the last year and in the face of rationality and amidst the failure of the Bush Administration's Iraq gambit, to the ruin of that nation, the same sort of PR buildup, aimed apparently at building a case for war with Iran, we witnessed prior to the invasion of Iraq ?

The administration of George W. Bush may be unraveling, coming apart at the seams, or imploding. But, Bush himself holds one trump card to overrule all trump cards ; war is its own logic, and US forces once committed to an attack on Iran will not be easily withdrawn. Once that Pandora's Box gets opened, whatever demons shriek out at the world will not go away but will be with us for decades or, in human terms, forever.

( image: detail from painting depicting the "St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre" )

The overwhelming bulk of available evidence points towards the likelihood that George W. Bush is a Christian Zionist who believes, really believes, in the need for maximal, catastrophic war in the Mideast. Over the past several months I have been conducting, by myself with the help of a few concerned friends, an exhaustive study of George W. Bush's likely religious beliefs, or his lack thereof. Gail Sheehey, at the onset of George W. Bush's presidential tenure, covered Bush's beliefs. But no one, as far as I can tell, who is familiar with Christian apocalyptic dispensationalism and with the intersection of religion and politics has made concerted effort to gather all available data bits on George Bush's religious belief.

Until now.

Evidence I have gleaned points in one troubling direction, and therefore towards a monumental bifurcation point in world history resting now in the hands, more than any human, of a man who appears to believe, in his heart, in the coming Apocalypse, in immanent, unavoidable Armageddon, in the "Rapture" of "Bible believing" Christians to heaven where they will, in safety, look down upon a world convulsing in hideous military conflict and the slaughter of hundreds of millions, billions of people even, by fire and sword, bullets and bombs, by nuclear incineration.

The Apocalypse, understood in either religious terms of merely viewed in secular terms, as catastrophic world war, would preclude meaningful action to address the penultimate world challenge of our time, Global Warming. Apocalypse would preclude meaningful action on AIDS and poverty, on preserving biodiversity, forests and ocean ecosystems. To significant action across a vast swath of imaginable world problems, even problems unrecognized as of yet, the Apocalypse would shut the door, perhaps forever.

At this moment in time, George W. Bush holds the keys to two radically different kingdoms ; two fates, one leading towards a constructive future and one leading towards catastrophe, towards terrible, destructive unraveling in the fabric of human and biological systems on Earth.

***

Hasn't George W. Bush Been Defanged ?

But, hasn't George W. Bush been rendered toothless and fangless ? Hasn't the charging Texas cowboy been knocked from his horse ?

That seems to be the common consensus :

Recently, I was discussing, with an editor at a national magazine who I'll leave unnamed, a curious issue : the apparent airbrushing of the logo image for a new national Christian lobbying group that lobbies for the Apocalypse, for catastrophic war in the Mideast. The 3rd Holiest site in Islamic had been wiped from the logo image and, intentional or not, the symbolism could have been wildly inflammatory to the Islamic world. Talk of the logo led, of course, to Mideast, and the editor agreed with me that Bush probably wanted maximal Mideast conflict but believed that wiser heads would prevail ; there was fightback, in Republican ranks even, against the Bush Administration's lust to expand the theater of Mideast conflict, to "fail forward" and attack Iran. Wiser heads, he reassured me, would prevail.

I'm not convinced though, and perhaps that's an artifact of what I've been studying lately ; the hot zone of religion and politics, especially when the religious beliefs in question are apocalyptic and the political realm in question concerns the loyalty, or lack thereof, of United States armed services members to religious pluralism, American Constitutional Democracy, and simply to not provoke catastrophic war, can be a troubling realm to pay attention to. Once, at an national environmental activist conference, I happened to overhear the staff of the facility hosting the event quip, about the environmentalists present, "they're worse than people with eating disorders" and I think the realm I gesturing at elicits a similar manic intensity... but for good reason. Sober heads, even advocates for a new Pax Americana such as "The Grand Chessboard" author Zbigniew Brzezinsky, have warned that a US attack on Iran could open a gateway to catastrophe.

As I covered yesterday, the US military has been penetrated to an unknown extent but, arguably, extensively by American Evangelicals with apocalyptic dispensationalist beliefs. Wars are comparatively easy to provoke, and an influential faction in American politics, a coalition perhaps including George W Bush, many evangelicals in the US military, many in Bush's core fundamentalist base, the lobbying blocks of CUFI and to some extent AIPAC, and busy cadres of writers, publicists, and PR specialists, are concertedly pushing for war with Iran.

Such a possibility would have seemed insane six or seven years ago at the onset of the Bush Administration, but here are and the most likely reason we have come to this grim possibility can be expressed in two words:

Christian Zionism.

"Bush addressed the CNP ( Council On National Policy ) in 1999 (there is, of course, no public record of what he said) and begins every day poring over Bible commentary. Do he and Laura read themselves to sleep with LaHaye? That he is sympathetic to what LaHaye stands for, religiously and politically (assuming they can be separated), is a legitimate conclusion. In 1993, Bush unguardedly divulged that only Christians can get to heaven. He secured his base, at the beginning of his presidential campaign, by speaking at Bob Jones University - which he refused to criticise for its ban on interracial dating. At his inauguration, he chose Franklin Graham to deliver the ceremonial prayer - the son of the venerable Billy (the evangelist who saved Bush from the demon drink), who has become notorious for telling the world that Islam "is a very evil and wicked religion". " ( UK Guardian, June 12, 2003 )

"Bush's first real encounter with Jesus came about with the Evangelical Reverend Billy Graham. No problem there. Reverend Graham, though once a registered Democrat, has made a point of staying non-partisan. Since then, Bush has kept the company of some odd pastors, such as James Robison, the anti-abortion fanatic who likes to quote both sides of his conversations with God. Robison prayed with Bush in the Oval Office before the invasion of Iraq. Another is one of Texas' foremost fundamentalist preachers, the Reverend James [sic] Hagee of the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio. Hagee is part of a more off-center form of Christianity tracing back to an Anglian priest who abandoned his church in 1820 to form his own sect. The beliefs Hagee brings from this, known as Dispensationalism, are too complicated to cover here, but basically revolve around Armegeddon and a literal reading of the Book of Revelation. This "end-times" theology can be seen in Bush's foreign policy.
In November of 2002, Hagee addressed his congregation of four thousand people, outlining a foreign policy strangely similar to Bush's policy set forth later. With then-House Majority Leader Tom Delay at his side, Hagee preached about regime change in Syria as well as Iraq, and about destroying the regime of Yasir Arafat. These were policies written six years earlier by Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., and others who are now part of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). Hagee stated, "Listen, Saddam, there's a Texan in the White House, and he's going to take you down."
On more than one occasion, Bush has claimed he takes his orders from God ... literally. Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Prime Minister, and Nabil Shaath, his Foreign Minister, describe their first meeting with President Bush in June 2003. Nabil Shaath relates the meeting: "President Bush said to all of us, 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq ..." And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'"
Israel's most reputable newspaper, Ha'aretz, related a similar story from the same time. At the cease-fire negotiations between Abbas and faction leaders from the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular and Democratic Fronts, Bush said, "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."

"What [Rev. Billy Graham] said sparked a change in my heart. We walked and talked at Walker's Point, and I knew I was in the presence of a great man... Reverend Graham planted a mustard seed in my soul... He led me to the path, and I began walking. It was the beginning of a change in my life." - Bush, A Charge to Keep, 1999

"...What are some of those signs we should be watching for?"

"Political unrest... Although Russia no longer is a threat as a superpower, many other nations have access to nuclear weapons and instantly could plunge the world into chaos with the push of a button..."

"Natural disasters... There have always been earthquakes, famines and other natural disasters in the world, but this century [the 20th] has witnessed more of them -- disasters with greater intensity."
"Social unrest... Jesus also said there would be an increase of wickedness and the love of many would grow cold (Matthew 24:12). Read the papers, we're already there."

"Religious apostasy... The 'faith which was once delivered unto the saints' (Jude 3) slowly has been eroded throughout this century to the point where the Word of God no longer has any authority in the minds of people."

"Economic instability... Many areas of the globe are experiencing this..."

"The rebirth of Israel. ...God has assimilated into one nation Jews of many cultures and languages and preserved them through five wars with their Arab neighbors. The people have reclaimed and rebuilt the old wastes of ancient cities, towns, and villages. All of this is a major miracle that points unmistakably to Israel's strategic role in the Lord's scenario for the last days."

"Evangelistic permeation... Never in history has there been such a concentrated effort to fulfill the Great Commission as in the days leading up to the start of the new millennium."

"The rise of the Antichrist... Antichrist is an apocalyptic figure that will rise to world power in the last days. He will control the world's economy and religion and will wage war against the church and Israel. Many have sought to identify him through the years with some contemporary figure, as some undoubtedly have resembled his qualities to some degree. Nevertheless, he may be alive right now and just waiting for the right moment to seize power." - Billy Graham, from Graham's last book, "The Beginning Of The End", 1999

"The Reverend Billy Graham taught Bush to live in anticipation of the Second Coming but it was his friendship with Dr. Tony Evans that shaped Bush's political understanding of how to deport himself in an apocalyptic era. Dr. Evans, the pastor of a large Dallas church and a founder of the Promise Keepers movement taught Bush about "how the world should be seen from a divine viewpoint," according to Dr. Martin Hawkins, Evans assistant pastor.

S.R. Shearer of Antipas Ministries writes, "Most of the leaders of the Promise Keepers embrace a doctrine of 'end time' (eschatology), known as 'dominionim.' Dominionism pictures the seizure of earthly (temporal) power by the 'people of God' as the only means through which the world can be rescued.... It is the eschatology that Bush has imbibed; an eschatology through which he has gradually (and easily) come to see himself as an agent of God who has been called by him to 'restore the earth to God's control', a 'chosen vessel', so to speak, to bring in the Restoration of All Thingss." Shearer calls this delusion, "Messianic leadership"-- that is to say usurping the role usually ascribed to the Messiah.

In Bush at War Bob Woodward writes, "Most presidents have high hopes. Some have grandiose visions of what they will achieve, and he was firmly in that camp."

To answer these attacks and rid the world of evil," says Bush. And again, "We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth in defense of this great nation." Grandiose visions. Woodward comments, "The president was casting his mission and that of the country in the grand vision of Gods Master Plan."

"The lessons of the Bible were a reason for his decision to run for president. He feels that God speaks to him." - Texas megachurch preacher and personal friend to George W. Bush, Dr. Tony Evans

"As Texan preacher Tony Evans, one of his spiritual advisors, recalls: "The lessons of the Bible were a reason for his decision to run for president. He feels that God speaks to him." From then on, Bush defined his work as a mission: "I am convinced that we must fundamentally and permanently change our entire culture. We need spiritual renewal in America."

The occasional churchgoer had become a pious man, a man who continues to practice rigorous discipline in the White House and incorporates the appropriate passage from the Bible into his daily agenda. The insecure drinker has become a president with whom mainstream Americans can identify, precisely because of his mediocrity, fallibility and devoutness."


"Dr. Martin Hawkins, Evans’ assistant pastor, Evans taught Bush "how the world should be seen from a divine viewpoint." And Bush says in his book, A Charge to Keep, that he has been "spellbound" listening to Evans’ sermons'

"Bush learned from Evans a whole new approach—cultural rather than economic—to winning political adherents. "On July 4, 1998, Governor Bush listened to Dr. Evans lay out a whole philosophy about how the world should be seen from a divine viewpoint and adjusted politically," says Evans's assistant pastor Dr. Martin Hawkins. Evans, who is said to be a confidant of the man he helped to become governor—they have prayed over the phone together—was one of the builders of the new Christian men's movement known as the Promise Keepers. He has urged men to "take back" authority from their wives, and women to "let your man be a man."

Bush did seem to find direction and develop discipline in his habits through his personal religious revival. "For some people, when they discover a faith in their religion, in God . . . it is a prescription for self-respect," says Lacey Neuhaus. But religion is also an important political tool for him. His evangelical Christianity gives him solid standing as a social conservative. It is also useful in dismissing questions about his character. All he has to say is that his life has changed dramatically since he accepted Christ. He is a new person, and his earlier, irresponsible conduct is irrelevant.

In his political sermons he began calling religious people to become involved in politics, and described the Bible as "a pretty good political handbook." He championed religious groups as the best instrument to change social policy, in place of government or in partnership with it. Not only was that music to the ears of the Christian right, it meant money in their coffers. Here was a politician who would channel government money not into social programs such as welfare but into church partnerships with the state.

Dr. Hawkins says, "There is a strong possibility that we would be one of the faith-based organizations that partner with the federal government, under President Bush, to reach out in the community to take care of housing and jobs."

Unabashedly fired up by the rhetoric of the Christian men's movement, Bush forgot that not everyone accepts Christ as his or her savior. He told a reporter in 1994 that the New Testament teaches that only those who accept Jesus Christ will go to Heaven."

Franklin Graham is more than a long-standing friend of Bush. He is a significant theological mentor. Bush has written in Christian magazines that Reverend Franklin and his father were pivotal in renewing his faith and religious committment as a Christian after his bout with alcoholism. The American public choose to be blithley unaware of Graham’s hatred of Islam. After the 9-11 attacks, and around the same time Bush declared his war on Islamist terrorists a "crusade," Franklin Graham made a highly publicized blanket condemnation of Islam on the Christian TV show 700 Club calling it "a very evil and wicked religion." He has often written that Islam and Christianity will fight each other before the second coming of Christ. Franklin Graham, like his father, who has been the confessor of several American presidents, believes Christ’s coming is imminent.

Given the indelicate words of this prominent Islamaphobe, one might expect the president to distance himself, but no. Gumbel reports that the president invited Franklin Graham to preach at the Good Friday 2003 prayer service held in the Pentagon. I would add that he participated in the Holy Service just as the American invasion of an Islamic country was at its peak.


WOLF BLITZER: So what's your bottom line? Do you believe, based on the reporting you did for this article, that the president of the United States is now aggressively plotting military action, a pre-emptive strike against Iran?

SEYMOUR HERSH: The word I hear is "messianic." He thinks, as I wrote, that he's the only one now who will have the courage to do it. He's politically free. I don't think he's overwhelmingly concerned about the '06 elections, congressional elections. I think he really thinks he has a chance, and this is going to be his mission.

"Again, the White House Web site records that on March 3, Bush told a Los Angeles audience, "God loves you, and I love you. And you can count on both of us as a powerful message that people who wonder about their future can hear." After mentioning himself in the same breath with God, Bush then topped himself when the Lancaster New Era reported on July 16 that in a private meeting with an Amish group in Lancaster County, he told them, "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job." The White House has denied the statement."


"Five months later, in August of 2003, MSNBC reported claims by televangelist Jack van Impe that the White House had contacted him seeking an outline of apocalyptic events. Van Impe wrote on his website, "I am not sure whether he (Bush) knows all of the prophecies and how deep of a student he has been in God's Word, but I was contacted a few weeks ago by the Office of Public Liaison for the White House and by the National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to make an outline. And I’ve spent hours preparing it. .. it’s in his (Bush’s) hands. He will know exactly what is going to happen in the Middle East and what part he will have under the leading of the Holy Spirit of God."... The White House has denied having made this request."

Mr Bush's Christian fervour only confirms suspicions that the looming war with Iraq is indeed a "crusade" against Muslims, exactly as Osama bin Laden suggests. For world-weary Europe the presidential language evokes mirth and queasiness in equal measure. A European leader who spoke in such terms would be laughed off the stage. An American one who speaks this way only increases the fear that simplicities of faith, and a habit of seeing a hideously complicated world in a black-and-white, good or evil fashion, are a recipe for disaster.

Chapter and Verse: Bush and the Bible

"Our prayer tonight is that God will see us through and keep us worthy. Hope still lights our way, and the light shines in the darkness and the darkness will not overcome it."

Speech on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks, 11 September 2002

"We do not claim to know all the ways of Providence. Yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life, and all of history. May he guide us now."

State of the Union address, 28 January 2003

"In the words of the prophet Isaiah, 'Lift your eyes and look to the heavens.'"

Address to the nation after the shuttle 'Columbia' disaster, 1 February 2003

"It is the greatest gift you can give anybody, to pray on their behalf."

At National Prayer Breakfast, 7 February 2003

"I welcome faith to solve the nation's deepest problems ... We're being challenged. We're meeting those challenges because of our faith ... We carried our grief to the Lord Almighty in prayer."

Speech to National Convention of Religious Broadcasters, 10 February 2003, referring to the 11 September terrorist attacks

"The Archive of Bush's Evil

I asked them the other day, would it be okay if I cut a 30-minute tape, a piece of propaganda, no questions, just here -- here it is, here's 30 minutes of me talking; please run it, not only across your airwaves but run it internationally, if you don't mind; I've got something to say about the conflict and our fight against evil.
President George W. Bush - 11/13

It is also a reminder of the great purpose of our great land, and that is to rid this world of evil and terror. The evil ones have roused a might nation, a mighty land. And for however long it takes, I am determined that we will prevail.
President George W. Bush - 11/12

Our nations share an urgent mission, which is to stop and defeat terrorism wherever it may exist. That mission is not directed against those who practice Islam. That mission is directed against evil people.
President George W. Bush - 11/10

The only thing I know certain about him is that he's evil. And I don't know what to believe about him, except that he wants to hurt Americans.
President George W. Bush - 11/10

In a second world war, we learned there is no isolation from evil. We affirmed that some crimes are so terrible they offend humanity, itself. And we resolved that the aggressions and ambitions of the wicked must be opposed early, decisively, and collectively, before they threaten us all. That evil has returned, and that cause is renewed.
President George W. Bush - 11/10

We're confident, too, that history has an author who fills time and eternity with his purpose. We know that evil is real, but good will prevail against it. This is the teaching of many faiths, and in that assurance we gain strength for a long journey.
President George W. Bush - 11/10

I think there is one universal law, and that's terrorism is evil, and all of us must work to reject evil. Murder is evil, and we must reject murder.
President George W. Bush - 11/9

America faces an evil and a determined enemy.
President George W. Bush - 11/9

None of us would ever wish the evil that has been done to our country, yet we have learned that out of evil can come great good.
President George W. Bush - 11/8

We know that we're fighting evil. And the American people are patient. They've heard the call.
President George W. Bush - 11/8

This is an evil man that we're dealing with. And I wouldn't put it past him to develop evil weapons to try to harm civilization as we know it.
President George W. Bush - 11/6

Given the means, our enemies would be a threat to every nation and, eventually, to civilization itself. So we're determined to fight this evil, and fight until we're rid of it. We will not wait for the authors of mass murder to gain the weapons of mass destruction. We act now, because we must lift this dark threat from our age and save generations to come.
President George W. Bush - 11/6

Our war that we now fight is against terror and evil... Our struggle is going to be long and difficult. But we will prevail. We will win. Good will overcome evil."

PARTIAL EXCERPT from archive of George W. Bush public statements on "evil"



*********

RESOURCES

Here are a number of stories on apocalyptic Christian Zionism

An Editorial Note:

That leading US politicians now happily appear at public events with, cheer on, and consent to share the stage with a man who advocates a fringe conspiracy theory some would call anti-Semitic and urges a "preemptive" use of nuclear weapons in order to cause widespread nuclear war indicates the extent to which US political and religious culture has lurched far right, towards what some call an "apocalyptic death cult", over the past four decades since the era in which Lyndon Johnson's 1964 presidential campaign devastated Barry Goldwater's presidential hopes by airing just one time a 30 second TV commercial, the "Daisy" ad, that effectively tarred Goldwater as eager for nuclear war. Now, for Republican politicians wooing a key bloc of evangelical GOP voters, public expressions of nuclear blood lust are no longer stigmatized or politically toxic ; they are an asset.

Friends Of Israel and AIPAC Envision "Israel's Final Holocaust" and "Jew Toast"

TTA contributor Chip Berlet, Senior Analyst for Political Research Associates, provides some background on the recent history of "New World Order" conspiracism among John Hagee's fellow Christian Zionists such as Tim LaHaye and Pat Robertson in The Age Old Conspiracy


Previous installments in an ongoing series, by Bruce Wilson, on John Hagee and Christian Zionism:


"Pro Israel" Christian Leader Blames Jews For The Holocaust


"Be Jewish In Five Easy Days", The Twelve Tribes Of Hagee

AIPAC Event Helps Mainstream Allegations Of "Satanic Liberal Jewish Conspiracy"


Holocaust For Zion : CUFI's Christian Zionism Made Simple


GOP House Minority Whip Roy Blunt To Help Nuclear War Advocate


What Secret "Other Matters" Did McCain Discuss With "Apocalypse Now" Hagee ?


Dick Armey Denies Bush Administration Trying To Provoke "End Times"

recent stories from other authors:

Frank Cocozzelli: Donohue Softpeddles Hagee's Catholic Bashing


Max Blumenthal : AIPAC Cheers an Anti-Semitic Holocaust Revisionist (and Abe Foxman Approves)

Sarah Posner: The Goy Who Cried Wolf: The Israel lobby gives America's leading Christian right warmonger a warm welcome

Max Blumenthal : Israel, the US, and the Christian Right: The Menage a Trois From Hell

Bill Berkowitz:Holy Warriors Set Sights on Iran

Esther Kaplan : Christian Zionism all juiced up

Richard Bartholomew : Armey: Bush Believes in Tribulation, but not Trying to Make it Happen

URL

Thursday, April 19, 2007

New Phil Giraldi article about Sibel Edmonds, Waxman

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Former CIA officer Phil Giraldi has a new piece out in the April 23, 2007 print edition of the American Conservative about Sibel Edmonds and our call to have Henry Waxman hold hearings into her case.

Giraldi is an expert in Sibel's case and features prominently in the new film about Sibel, Kill The Messenger.

I've electronically liberated the article in full, all errors are mine etc.

California Congressman Henry Waxman's Oversight & Government Reform Committee has been investigating allegations that the Bush administration might be concealing something about the Niger document forgeries, that it maliciously outed CIA operative Valerie Plame, and that it has looked the other way over massive fraudulent contracting in Iraq. These investigations are admirable and very much in the public interest. He has been less interested in pursuing another matter, however. FBI whistle blower Sibel Edmonds and her numerous supporters both inside and outside of government have been urging Waxman to hold open hearings on her claims regarding malfeasance and corruption among high-level government officials.

Edmonds is subject to a State Secrets Privilege gag order initiated at the request of the Pentagon and State Department, but she has recently elaborated on her allegations, stating that investigations already carried out by the FBI would demonstrate that three former senior officials were involved in illegal weapons sales and other activities that would justify charges of espionage and possibly even treason against them. The three are leading Pentagon neoconservatives Douglas Feith and Richard Perle, as well as former State Department number three Marc Grossman. Edmonds is no crackpot and is considered to be a credible witness, most of whose charges were substantiated both by former FBI officials in 2002 and by the Department of Justice in 2005. Waxman appears to be uninterested in pursuing the matter, however, possibly because Israeli officials and the country's defense industry are believed to have been involved in the weapons diversion activity.

Congressman Waxman is regarded as close to Israel's principal lobby, AIPAC, and even promised Jewish voters back in November 2006 that there would be no Democratic congressional committee chairmen involved with Middle Eastern policy who were not completely supportive of Israel.

As Giraldi says in Kill The Messenger:
All of these people (Perle, Feith) have been investigated by the FBI at one point or another for passing secret information to Israel.

In no cases were any of them convicted. The prosecutions were dropped… in my opinion because of political pressure not to get into this kind of case that involves
'Israel' and 'Espionage'.
I'm not yet ready to write-off the possibility that Waxman will hold hearings into Sibel's case. He has previously promised to do so, and we haven't yet heard from his office that he won't hold hearings. Congress has been in recess for the past two weeks and we'll be attempting to get him on the record one way or other this week. I've been told that a number of prominent-ish people tried to get Waxman to go on the record on Monday (yesterday) in response to Giraldi's new article to no avail - but surely he can't maintain that position, so in the meantime, no news is good news.

Oh - and for those of you who are saying 'Huh? AIPAC? Israel? I thought Sibel's case was about Turkey and the American Turkish Council (ATC)!' Sibel says that both AIPAC and the ATC both essentially operate as fronts for the same criminal organization. Or as Giraldi put it in his earlier article about Sibel's case:
On one level, (Sibel's) story appears straightforward: several Turkish lobbying groups allegedly bribed congressmen to support policies favourable to Ankara. But beyond that, the Edmonds revelations become more serpentine and appear to involve AIPAC, Israel and a number of leading neoconservatives who have profited from the Turkish connection.
I'll keep you updated, of course. Stay tuned, and thanks for your help & support, again.

Global Strike Still on Pentagon Wish List

April 2007

Picture a grim scenario: U.S. intelligence learns that terrorists in a remote location are preparing an attack against the United States . The window of opportunity to react is a few hours at most, and no U.S. air, ground, or sea forces are close enough to act. The only current options, according to Pentagon officials, are to do nothing or fire a nuclear-armed, long-range ballistic missile.

The commander in charge of deployed U.S. nuclear weapons, Strategic Command chief General James Cartwright, says neither option is attractive. He wants another alternative: long-range ballistic missiles carrying conventional warheads.

Lawmakers last year were largely unconvinced of the wisdom of such a step, however, fearing particularly that Russia might mistake the launch of a conventional ballistic missile for a surprise nuclear attack requiring instant retaliation. They trimmed funding for the project from $127 million to $25 million and called for further study of the concept. (See ACT, November 2006.)

The studies are unfinished, but Cartwright and the Pentagon are back this year, asking Congress for $175 million to proceed with the project as part of the fiscal year 2008 budget request. The initial phase calls for substituting conventional warheads for nuclear warheads on two submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) for each of the dozen deployed U.S. ballistic missile submarines. The boats would continue to carry 22 nuclear-armed SLBMs apiece.

Testifying March 8 before the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Cartwright said the Pentagon still needed a way to hit targets worldwide with a conventional warhead in under an hour. Surveying both offensive and defensive military assets, Cartwright asserted that “where we have a hole…is in the prompt global strike side of the equation.” This void could be filled in two years with the SLBM conversion, according to Strategic Command.

In his prepared remarks, Cartwright noted that “use of a nuclear weapon system in prompt response may be no choice at all.” Cartwright later testified that something “below the nuclear threshold” was required for “fleeting, high-value, high-regret factor-type threats.”

Legislators remain wary. Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), the subcommittee chair, told Cartwright that prompt global strike is a “powerful concept, but there are a number of important questions that need to be answered before moving forward with any particular program.”

Aside from the worry that Russia and, perhaps someday, China might misinterpret a U.S. conventional missile launch as nuclear, some analysts and congressional aides have expressed other concerns. For example, they note that a launch order would be heavily reliant on intelligence, which can be limited or faulty, as demonstrated by the incorrect allegations about Iraqi unconventional weapons. In particular, the skeptics dread that the possibility of error could be magnified by the abbreviated timeline in which military and political leaders might need to make a decision. They also fear that providing a new use for ballistic missiles might enhance their perceived utility at a time that the United States has been seeking to stop their spread.

Congress has tasked the National Academy of Sciences to evaluate the need for a prompt global strike capability and how best to achieve it in varying time frames: one to two years, three to five years, and more than five years. The academy's Naval Studies Board initiated the 15-month, $5 million study earlier this year. Lawmakers had requested a preliminary report by March 15, but one has yet to be submitted.

The Pentagon is exploring other prompt strike capabilities aside from converting SLBMs, but they are longer-term possibilities. Cartwright noted that Air Force Space Command is developing a long-range ballistic missile option for launch from the United States .

Lt. Col. Randi Steffy, chief of operations for U.S. Strategic Command public affairs, told Arms Control Today in a Feb. 21 e-mail that the SLBM conversion is “only the first step in a larger plan for prompt global strike.” Steffy added that the command supports the development of such capabilities “in whatever form is deemed appropriate by Congress.”

Wade Boese

Ridiculous NYT and Pentagon claims of Shiite Iranian arms going to Sunnis

April 18, 2007

When all else fails, blame Iran (Part II)

Posted by Scott Harrop at April 18, 2007 11:47 PM

Matters must be really deteriorating in Afghanistan. Why else would the Pentagon brass now be darkly suggesting that Iranian arms have been "captured," supposedly on their way to the Taliban? It sounds suspiciously like the tired old formula; when matters go really bad somewhere in the Middle East, change the subject and blame Iran.

Michael R. Gordon today is competing yet again to be chief salesman for such ominous news. Media bloggers have taken to deeming him the resident "ghost of Judith Miller" at the New York Times, the journalist most willing to "take out Cheney’s trash."

Lately, Gordon has been quite active in reviving support for getting tougher on Iran.

Last week, I commented here on the Pentagon's odd claim that Iran was now not only supporting Iraqi Shia insurgents, but Sunni fighters as well. On February 10th, it was Michael R. Gordon who had started the latest round of Iran-as-the-source-of-trouble-in-Iraq" with a front-page "scoop" that breathlessly cited un-named US sources to contend that Iran was intentionally providing deadly munitions to kill Americans. Gordon's follow-up report generously allowed his sources to defend their claims amid the "controversy," which even a NYTimes editorial criticized. (Amazingly, that editorial neglected to mention that it was their own reporter - Gordon - who catalyzed the controversy).

Like Judy Miller, Gordon has long specialized in providing red meat for neoconservative circles.

Last November, it was Michael R. Gordon reporting that "Iran-backed" Hizbullah was training Iraqi Shia fighters. And throughout the fall, Gordon filed one “report” after another citing "experts" and "analysts" cautioning against quick withdrawal from Iraq, then condemning the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group (particularly the idea to talk to Iraq’s neighbors), and then advocating a "surge" of more troops into Iraq.

Back in 2002, it was Michael R. Gordon who wrote regularly with Judith Miller about Iraqi WMD capabilities, most infamously about the aluminum tubes presumed for Iraq's nuclear program. The obvious intent of such articles was to drum up support for invading Iraq sooner rather than later.

The New York Times flagellated itself last year for such bad reporting, and specifically cited the Miller-Gordon "tubes" story as one of the worst examples. Yet Michael R. Gordon remains the Times' lead "military" correspondent.

In a contentious interview last year with Amy Goodman, Gordon curiously claimed that he was merely a recorder of the best intelligence and analysis available (pre-Iraq invasion) and that later "dissenters" had not contacted him.

That's a curious defense. Shouldn't the reporters be the ones casting about for different views?

Gordon may have thought himself funny when he told Goodman: "I'm actually not Judy Miller." !

Really?

Today, the NYTimes designates none other than Michael R. Gordon to tell us that Iran is supporting the Taliban (sic) in Afghanistan. That's right, Iran is now accused of sending arms to the Taliban, Iran's mortal arch-enemy.

In 2000, then Bush advisor Condoleze Rice well-illustrated her lack of Middle East credentials (coming into office) when she confidently told the Washington Post that the Taliban were "clients" of Iran. The media has largely forgotten that absurd gaffe.

Now, thanks to Michael R. Gordon, we have insinuations floating that by golly, maybe Condi Rice was “right” all along.

Not!

By Gordon's (very low) "standards," his report on the alleged Iran-Taliban link is relatively tame:

First, this time he has a named source at the top: Joint Chiefs’ Chair, Peter Pace, who said simply, “We have intercepted weapons in Afghanistan headed for the Taliban that were made in Iran.” Gordon also included Pace's caution that, “It’s not as clear in Afghanistan which Iranian entity is responsible.”

About half of Gordon’s report about Iran in Afghanistan repeats Gordon's claims about Iran's alleged involvement in Iraqi (sic) mayhem. But Gordon lamely notes that Iran's role in Afghanistan has been more "complicated," noting past Iranian clashes with the Taliban, Iran's support of the Afghan Northern Alliance (which resisted the Taliban), and Iran's firm, cooperative role establishing the current Karzai government.

Gordon manages to find one scholar, Barnett Rubin, to lend a plausible, yet highly speculative argument that Iran, or some element therein, might be consciously interested in supporting their mortal foe - the Taliban.

"The Iranians believe the No. 1 threat is an American attack to overthrow their government. They may do anything it takes to make the United States and its allies uncomfortable there.”

Gordon doesn't bother quoting any of those observers who would counter that Iran has little, if any, interest in supporting the Taliban or the Iraqi Sunni insurgents. No doubt Gordon might again disingenuously claim that no such "dissenters" contacted him.

AP even worse:

Robert Burns, an AP military correspondent, has the "distinction" for out-hyping Gordon. Burns cites two unreliable sources to magnify the Pace claim. First, Burns quotes Mohammad Mohaddessin, a spokesman for the "National Council of Resistance of Iran" (aka the "People's Mujahedin") who claims that,

"Export of fundamentalism and terrorism to neighboring and Islamic countries has been one of the pillars of the clerical regime's foreign policy - something that the Iranian resistance has warned about for the past two decades."

With respect to Iran's ties to Afghanistan, such a black and white statement is ridiculous -- as even Michael Gordon's report should demonstrate. Burns also doesn't mention that the NCR/PMOI is still on the State Department's terrorist list.

Burns also trots out Michael Rubin, now of the neoconservative bastion at the American Enterprise Institute. Rubin attempts to debunk any suggestion that Iran might have ever played a constructive role in Afghanistan, deeming any Iranian efforts to increase its influence in Afghanistan as nefariously aimed at America....

"Iran's leadership often strikes pragmatic relationships to further their influence at our expense... A lot of testimonials about Iranian assistance in Afghanistan are based more on wishful thinking than reality."

Rubin thus still sings the rigid tune of the neocon ideologue - that nothing good, by definition, can come out of Iran, short of regime change.

Not surprisingly, these reports from Gordon and Burns make no mention of far more likely and substantial sources of support for the Taliban – namely, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

The Guardian Stands out...:

Curiously, the Washington Post hasn't even bothered to report on the Pace claim - perhaps they saw it for what it was. In my searches thus far, only Britain's Guardian (April 19th edition) has cast a skeptical eye on the intended insinuation. Writing from his base in Kabul, Declan Walsh reports Pace's charge and then (unlike Burns & Gordon) runs a reality check with locals in Afghanistan:

First, he quotes Afghan General Mohiyadeen Ghori, commander of the 205th Corps stationed in Helmand, who said his troops had recovered Iranian-manufactured weapons from insurgents in Farah province, and that Iran was funding insurgents in Garmser district, where several British soldiers have died in heavy fighting.

However, General Ghori also indicates that such funds were being channelled through drug smugglers based in Iranian Baluchistan, and "All they are interested in is money."

Walsh closes his report with the following telling observation:

"Some western officials in Kabul treated the allegations of Taliban support with scepticism yesterday. One said Iranian weapons had been freely available on the black market since the 1990s, when Tehran shipped arms to groups fighting the Taliban. "Out of every 10 Kalashnikovs, one is Iranian," he said. "This is all a war of words. It has very little basis in reality."

Walsh's story also cites western officials suspecting that such charges "coincided with mounting speculation about possible US air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities."

Tehran Radio

Tehran Radio (VOIR in Persian - trans. BBC monitoring) earlier today broadcast a dismissal of the Pace allegations. Apart from noting the strong cultural bonds between Iran and Afghanistan which made an active Iranian presence "inevitable," the commentary noted that,

Iran is one of the few countries that have fulfilled its financial aid promises for the reconstruction of Afghanistan, and the measures Tehran has taken for the reconstruction of Afghanistan have all been important and effective.

As for accusations from America to the contrary,

"The military machine of America is stuck in the Afghan mountains and quagmires. In order to justify this situation, American has to blame others and attribute its own problems to foreign countries. There was no mention of Iran up until yesterday, but the more America is frustrated in Afghanistan, the more it focuses its psychological warfare on Iran. The statement of America's chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff yesterday is an example of this.

In short, when all else fails, blame Iran.

Tehran Radio also dabbled a bit in analyzing American politics:

The claim is concurrent with the pressures exerted by the Congress and America's public opinion for withdrawal from [Iraq?] and having constructive interaction with Iran. This can be interpreted as a new attempt to cause the Democrats in the Congress to fail in their move to approach Iran.

So that's what it's all about. Senator Webb, take notes.

Saturday, April 7, 2007

EFP's made in Iraq, not Iran: Pentagon lies, again

Iraqi, US forces sweep through volatile city, fight Sadr backers

Published: Saturday, 7 April, 2007, 08:50 AM Doha Time

DIWANIYA, Iraq: Iraqi and US forces clashed with Shia militia loyal to the radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr yesterday in a dawn operation aimed at returning the volatile city of Diwaniya to government control. In Ramadi, west of Baghdad, a truck bomb killed at least 10 people and wounded 24 in the latest in a string of attacks that have spewed poisonous chlorine gas into the air, three Iraqi police officers said. A fourth officer put the toll at 35 dead.

The Iraqi government said this week it was extending a seven-week-old US-Iraqi security crackdown in Baghdad to other cities as it seeks to halt the slide to sectarian civil war.

While the crackdown has succeeded in reducing the murder rate in Baghdad, the government says militants forced out of the capital have turned other areas into new “killing fields”.

Iraqi and US troops fought militiamen in southeast Diwaniya, a stronghold of Sadr’s Mehdi Army, which the Pentagon says poses the greatest threat to peace in Iraq. The head of Sadr’s office in the city blamed rogue gunmen.

Pamphlets dropped by US helicopters warned police, who are suspected of being infiltrated by the militia, to stay off the streets. Any found carrying weapons would be shot.

A US military spokesman said three to six “enemy fighters” were killed, five wounded and 17 captured. US and Iraqi forces suffered no fatalities, Lieutenant-Colonel Scott Bleichwehl said.
A Mehdi Army leader said six women and children were wounded when a US helicopter fired on a hostel in the city. Bleichwehl said the report was untrue. The militia leader also said four men on motorbikes were shot dead by US and Iraqi troops.

Resident Qassim Abid said he saw two armoured vehicles damaged by roadside bombs and a third by rocket-propelled grenades. There was no independent confirmation.

The director of Diwaniya’s health directorate, Hameed Jaati, said the local hospital had received one body and 15 wounded.

“Iraqi army soldiers swept into the city of Diwaniya early this morning to disrupt militia activity and return security and stability of the volatile city back to the government of Iraq,” the US military said in a statement.

Bleichwehl said troops, facing scattered resistance, discovered a factory that produced “explosively formed penetrators” (EFPs), a particularly deadly type of explosive that can destroy a main battle tank and several weapons caches.

Residents said a curfew had been imposed as troops blocked streets and conducted house-to-house searches.

“It is good they have started this operation because we have been living in fear recently,” said Ali Hassan, 45, a worker with seven children. “We could not go out after dark or allow our children to go outside on their own.”

In Ramadi, capital of western Anbar province that is the heartland of the Sunni Arab insurgency, police colonel Tareq al-Dulaimi said the chlorine truck bomb targeted a police patrol, killing 35 people and wounding at least 45 more.

But Captain Louay al-Dulaimi and two colleagues from a police station near the explosion put the death toll at 10.

There has been a spate of chlorine truck bomb attacks, mainly in Anbar. US commanders and Iraqi police have blamed Al Qaeda militants for several of the attacks.

Police in Basra indicated an explosion that destroyed a British armoured fighting vehicle, killing four soldiers and a translator on Thursday, was caused by a new type of bomb.

“We found two bombs ... that were similar to the bomb that exploded targeting the British troops,” Major General Mohamed Moussawi said. “These are new bombs that haven’t been used and do not have a precedent in southern Iraq.”

The bomb blast left a crater several metres across and a metre deep in the road.
US and British forces have accused neighbouring Shia Iran of supplying Shia militias with EFPs, which are normally placed on the side of the road and fire a metal projectile embedded in the device into the target at high speed.
Publish
But a Western explosives expert in Iraq said it appeared from photographs of the crater that the blast had been caused by a commercial landmine buried in the road, not by an EFP. – Reuters

No Saddam 'al-Qaeda'Link: Full Pentagon report

PDF

Thursday, April 5, 2007

Tacoma to Send Pentagon the Bill for Policing Antiwar Port Protests

Last updated April 2, 2007 10:20 p.m. PT

Anti-war protests cost Tacoma $500,000

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

TACOMA -- Tacoma police say last month's 12-day anti-war protests cost the city an unbudgeted $500,000 to provide a large-scale law enforcement presence.

The rough estimate covers overtime, regular compensation, equipment and food for hundreds of workers from Tacoma police and other agencies, Assistant Chief Bob Sheehan said.

The city plans to ask the Port of Tacoma and the military to cover some of the costs.

"That's a tremendous hit on our budget -- a half-million dollars of unexpected expense," said Tacoma Mayor Bill Baarsma, adding that the military would get the first invoice.

"I think our request is justifiable," Baarsma said. "I would expect that we would be reimbursed. I would be surprised if we weren't."

Police increased law enforcement at the Port of Tacoma during the convoying and storage of Army Stryker vehicles from March 3 until a ship carrying the military equipment left for Iraq on March 14.

Protesters were there each night.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Former top Rumsfeld aide new head of World Jewish Congress

Imagine that.
---
Backroom Battler for Rumsfeld and Bronfman Finds Himself Centerstage in High-stakes Struggle


Stephen Herbits has moved through many halls of power during the past decade: He worked at the side of secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon, then jumped into the fray of gay activism in Miami and finally ended up as head of the World Jewish Congress, one of the most storied and influential Jewish organizations in the world.

At each of these stops he was brought in as a short-term fixer, valued for his organizational prowess and his willingness to crack heads. In each case, Herbits quickly assumed more influence than expected, ultimately colliding with other big players at the top. This may explain why, after two top officials at the WJC were fired last week, many insiders focused their attention on Herbits, the organization’s top professional.

“Herbits is in charge,” said Pierre Besnainou, president of the European Jewish Congress. “He is not the chairman or the president. He has been acting as though he is, but he is not, and that is a problem.”

The firings last week were part of a larger battle for control of the WJC — with multiple billionaires pushing to succeed billionaire beverage heir Edgar Bronfman as president. While this public battle has simmered, people on the inside say that it is Herbits, a longtime business consultant of Bronfman’s and now the WJC’s secretary general, who has been running the organization with a firm hand.

During his two-year tenure at the organization, Herbits has filed multiple lawsuits, sparred with regional branches — leading one to pull out of the WJC — and fired longtime employees. In recent months, he has moved beyond administration to play a key role in the organization’s high-profile efforts to fight Iran’s nuclear program. All this, despite having hardly any prior experience in the Jewish organizational world.

Herbits’s willingness to take on big responsibility in new areas was also evident in his work at the Pentagon. During his most recent stint at the Defense Department, Herbits wrote up a memo calling for Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, to become America’s top man in Iraq. According to a new book on Rumsfeld by Andrew Cockburn, the proposal contained an intriguing wrinkle: Herbits would be Wolfowitz’s right-hand man in Iraq, running the day-to-day operations there.

The details are in dispute — Herbits says the idea for him to come along was actually Wolfowitz’s — but not the portrait of Herbits as a man who generally works behind the scenes and is not afraid to offer up bold proposals.

“The reason that people like Rumsfeld and Bronfman have me is because I’m willing to say, ‘Hey, stop, listen to me; you’ve got to think about this differently, ’” said Herbits in an interview with the Forward at the WJC’s Manhattan offices on the day the recent firings at the organization were announced.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Herbits’s string of high-powered jobs is that they have come since he retired from the career that took up most of his professional life, at Seagram, where he was Edgar Bronfman’s business lieutenant. At 64, Herbits has charged ahead with youthful insouciance.

It is a youthfulness that comes across in person. He has the taut frame and closely cropped hair of a much younger man. During the interview with the Forward, in which he frequently tipped back in his chair, Herbits rolled up his sleeves to reveal a beaded wooden bracelet and a plastic orange band imprinted with the word “compassion.”

At the WJC, as at the Pentagon, the man at the top brought in Herbits personally. At the WJC, it was Bronfman, his boss from Seagram. The two men have long been close. In addition to serving the WJC, Herbits has continued working with Bronfman on business deals they started at Seagram. Last fall, the two traveled to China together to check up on a juice project.

Bronfman brought Herbits into the WJC after critics began claiming that the former beverage mogul had run the organization like a personal fiefdom with his lieutenant on Jewish issues, Rabbi Israel Singer — the man fired by Bronfman two weeks ago. The allegations soon led to an investigation by the New York attorney general.

Herbits used his administrative prowess to guide the organization through the probe, which ended with a final report criticizing past practices at the WJC but praising reforms instituted by Herbits. But if Herbits’s brash style helped the organization weather the investigation, critics say it has only exacerbated concerns that the WJC is run with too much control in the hands of Bronfman and his loyalists.

Since the firings last week, both the European and Israeli branches have threatened to withdraw from the organization, pointing to Herbits’s managerial style.

“With Mr. Herbits, it’s ‘Either accept what I want — or you are not my partner for anything,’” said Shai Hermesh, chairman of the Israeli branch. Hermesh is also a member of the Knesset. “From the moment I came on here,” Hermesh said, “everything is Mr. Herbits.”

Hermesh and other critics say that Herbits’s litigious approach to conflict has also created new financial concerns for the organization. In Herbits’s first year, the WJC spent $3 million more than in the previous year, and $7 million more than the organization brought in, according to tax documents. A large chunk of this money went to lawyers.

Other big-ticket items were Herbits’s own $420,000 salary — making him one of the top-paid professionals on the Jewish communal scene — and the salary for a new development director, who is Herbits’s old friend.

Herbits says he has since taken a pay cut, but he argues that his old salary was justified by the 24-hour days he put in during the investigation. He dismissed the criticism as unavoidable collateral damage for questioning the sloppy finances of others.

“Start asking yourself, ‘Why are people saying things when they’re not true?’” Herbits said. “What’s their story here? What’s their agenda, that they’re putting this bullshit out there?”

The new head of the WJC’s American section, Rabbi Marc Schneier, said that Herbits is exactly the aggressive personality that WJC has needed in a time of change.

“Steve can be a real pit bull. He’s very determined,” Schneier said. “He has a mandate to clean up this organization, and when you do that you do ruffle feathers. Some people are not very happy. But the proof is in the pudding. The most critical task was to restore the financial integrity and the good name of the WJC.”

Herbits grew up in Massachusetts in what he has described as a “classic liberal Jewish family.” His habit of moving between positions of power began soon after college, when he bounced from business school to a congressional job and then finally to the Pentagon, where he was an assistant to Rumsfeld in his first tenure as secretary of defense.
After law school at Georgetown University — and the demise of the Gerald Ford administration — Herbits moved over to Seagram, which was owned by the Bronfman family. During his time at Seagram, Herbits took occasional breaks to serve on the transition teams of Republican administrations, but he devoted most of his time to Seagram, where he remained until his first retirement in 1997.

In a hopeful development for aging go-getters everywhere, it has been in post-retirement that Herbits has done much of his most exciting and world-changing work — a turn of events that he said was totally unexpected.

“Only two people in the world could have gotten me to go back to work,” Herbits said.

One of them, Rumsfeld, called Herbits after being tapped by President-elect Bush for a second stint as secretary of defense. The plan was for Herbits to serve as “transition director,” whipping the Pentagon personnel into order and then leaving.

The most complete chronicle of this stint in Washington is contained in Bob Woodward’s book, “State of Denial,” in which Herbits plays a recurring role as a “one-man think tank” as well as “a management fix it man somewhat as Karl Rove did for President Bush.” According to Woodward, in one of Herbits’s first days at work he told Rumsfeld, “You’ve got to fire somebody.”

“You’ve got to let people know who’s boss here,” Herbits said.

Herbits got into trouble when he pushed against an appointment made by then-Senate majority leader Trent Lott. Socially conservative elements in the Republican Party were already gunning for Herbits because he was gay. When Lott’s appointment came up, Lott demanded that Herbits leave the administration.

Herbits returned to Washington after the September 11 terrorist attacks and quickly became a central player in the run up to the Iraq War. He helped choose the presidential envoy to Iraq, Paul Bremer, after his initial suggestion of Wolfowitz was turned down. He was also one of the few people to openly question the administration’s postwar planning. In the end, no one escaped Herbits’s critical eye.

In a memo he wrote about his own boss, cited in Woodward’s book, Herbits said Rumsfeld was “often abusive,” “trusts very few people” and would not “accept that some people in some areas were smarter than he.”

One sacred cow that Herbits did not take on in Washington was the ban on gays serving openly in the military (the law did not apply to Herbits, who was a civilian employee). Herbits told the Forward that he did not want to enter into an endless argument with his superiors, particularly given that he knew Rumsfeld and Vice President Cheney did not agree with the regulation.

“Both of them would change it in a second if the president changed his mind,” Herbits said. “It would be gone in a second — I know that.”

Herbits left the Pentagon for good in 2004 and gave Rumsfeld three reasons: One was that the Pentagon chief had stopped taking his advice; the second was “the administration policy of breaking down the wall between church and state,” and the third was his concern with Bush’s “anti-gay” stance .

Herbits said he told Rumsfeld: “I know for a fact that the president is not personally anti-gay, and yet he’s so cynical that he’s willing to use that as an issue in the election to get elected.”

Back in Miami, Herbits became involved with a number of different gay political organizations. At the Dade Human Rights Foundation, Herbits “ended up being kind of in charge without any official title,” according to Steve Levin, a board member at the foundation.

His more public work was leading the opposition to a ballot measure that sought to kill a gay rights ordinance. The ballot measure was successfully defeated, but his work still attracted criticism from within the gay community.

Fellow gay activist Steven Baird wrote, in a widely distributed 2002 letter, “Herbits, a relative newcomer both to Miami-Dade County and to openly broad-based community activism, has a penchant for secret deals and an aversion to open, deliberative community process.”

One such quiet deal was the one that led to the hiring of Herbits’s good friend, Herb Juli, to be director of development at the Dade Human Rights Foundation.

“Steve Herbits wanted something — and that is what would happen,” said Levin. “Herbits wanted Herb Juli on the payroll, and so Juli was put on the payroll.”

Herbits acknowledged that the man was an old friend, but he said that Juli, a former insurance agent, was a qualified fundraiser. At the time, Herbits wrote an article in a Miami gay newspaper asserting that the organization’s financial situation was improving, citing Juli’s hiring as one of the reasons.

In the end, the foundation went bankrupt in 2004. There have been no allegations that this was due to Juli’s work.

Questions about Herbits’s pushing Juli for a job have come up again at the WJC. When Herbits created a new fundraising arm for the organization, he again recommended Juli, who now runs the WJC foundation from Miami.

Herbits defended the practice of recommending qualified friends and said that in his many years of helping the White House find personnel he had never shied away from putting forward people he knew personally.

When Herbits came to the WJC, the organization was fighting its own battle against claims of cronyism and insider dealings.

A WJC senior vice president, Isi Leibler, went public in the fall of 2004 with charges that Edgar Bronfman had run the organization with little oversight, and little input, from the national Jewish communities that make up the congress. In particular, Leibler complained about the unmonitored movement of $1.2 million from a Swiss bank account. The allegations eventually led the New York attorney general to open its investigation of the WJC.

Bronfman hired Herbits with little consultation and gave him free reign to deal with the scandal. Herbits’s fiery approach to detractors came out soon after he was hired, when he spoke with a reporter for New York magazine and went to town on other Jewish organizations.

“I’m not going to sit by and let this organization take the rap for their behavior,” Herbits was quoted as saying in the February 28, 2005 issue. “If we get into that kind of pissing match, this organization ain’t going down by itself.”

Other Jewish communal officials called for an apology, but none was forthcoming. Herbits now says that the comments may have been “indelicate” but he does not regret them. “It put a marker down and said someone’s running it.”

Herbits spent the next year taking on all critics of the investigation and instituting reforms in coordination with the attorney general.

“There has been more governance in the last two years than there was in the last 30 years,” Herbits told the Forward last week.

It has been his work since the investigation, however, that has been attracting the most flak within the WJC.

The first point of contention was the decision to sue Leibler, the WJC’s most public critic, for libel. Besnainou said it was primarily Herbits who wanted to go after Leibler.

Herbits denies he was the main agitator, but in his interview two weeks ago with the Forward, he acknowledged for the first time that the suit was a mistake. The suit was withdrawn after Jewish communities around the world protested. The Jewish community in Leibler’s home country, Australia, resigned from the WJC, and the organization was forced to pay Leibler’s legal bills.

Now Herbits has other foes, including leaders of the Israeli branch, whom he has accused of serial financial mismanagement. Herbits cut off all funding to the Israeli offices, and in a conference call last week he said, “It is unreasonable behavior to pretend there is anything going on here but a financial cover up.”

The Israelis have said that Herbits has attacked them because they resisted his efforts to take control of the operations in Jerusalem.

Now, though, the issue is not the control of a single regional branch but rather the entire WJC. Until his firing last week, Singer was viewed as the policy brains behind the organization and as its most effective public ambassador. Herbits said Singer’s dismissal and other recent controversial moves were necessary steps in cleaning up an organization that has struggled for too long.

“Up until I got here, the way the WJC operated was that if somebody had a problem, you would buy them off — or you’d make a deal,” Herbits said. “Well, peace at any cost isn’t peace.”


Related
Source of WJC Leak a Mystery