The Forward Discusses Israel's Role in Iraq War
You may have read elsewhere about an Israeli General's suggestion that post Saddam Iraq will be less favorable to Israel than when the dictator held power. The Forward discusses this issue and mentions James Risen's (NYT) book 'State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration.'
The portion of Risen's book that is discussed deals with Israeli involvement in the pre-Iraq war intellegence build up.
Frankly, I had thought there was some doubt, or even denial, regarding Israeli involvement. This puts that doubt to rest.
This information received virtually no coverage when the book was first put out. It seems like an important revelation to me.
Antony Lowenstein
The Forward
The portion of Risen's book that is discussed deals with Israeli involvement in the pre-Iraq war intellegence build up.
Frankly, I had thought there was some doubt, or even denial, regarding Israeli involvement. This puts that doubt to rest.
"In a section on the prewar jockeying in Washington, Risen describes the role of Paul Wolfowitz, then undersecretary of defense. Wolfowitz, he writes, found the CIA 'insufficiently hawkish,' believed it 'an arrogant, rogue institution...unwilling to support administration policymakers.' Specifically, Wolfowitz insisted on examining 'the possibility that Saddam Hussein was behind the [September 11] attacks on the United States,' a possibility that the CIA discounted.
"Now comes the kicker: 'Israeli intelligence played a hidden role in convincing Wolfowitz that he couldn't trust the CIA... Israeli intelligence officials frequently travelled to Washington to brief top American officials, [confirming reports from Karen Kwiatkowski] but CIA analysts were often sceptical of Israeli intelligence reports, knowing that Mossad had very strong - even transparent - biases about the Arab world.' [You think?] Wolfowitz, who 'had begun meeting personally with top Israeli intelligence officials,' preferred the Mossad's analysis to the CIA's.
This information received virtually no coverage when the book was first put out. It seems like an important revelation to me.
Antony Lowenstein
The Forward
posted by Brian at 7:56 PM
9 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Your comment was non-topical squid ink. The article written by Leonard Fein and the Book by James Risen, not AL.
Even AL was involved your amateur physiological analysis was less than worthless.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
test
With all that has been confirmed over the last three years, it's fascinating to recall how in the summer of 2002 it was considered "anti-Semitic" to notice that the folks yelling loudest for war were Zionists with obsessional attachments to the second homeland.
Remember Congressman Moran ("anti-Semitic"), General Zinni ("anti-Semitic"), Congressman Byrd ("anti-Semitic"), Senator Hollings ("anti-Semitic"), Foreign Secretary Robin Cook ("anti-Semitic"), 9-11 Commission Director Philip Zelikow ("anti-Semitic"), CIA al Qaeda expert Michael Scheuer ("anti-Semitic"), and all the rest who spoke out?
Remember the performance of our "free press"?
Why is there any doubt about Israel's hyping of the Iraq invasion? Viktor Ostrovsky lays it out in plain English in " By Way of Deception," including the official mantra, picked up by the neocon crowd verbatim. That dates to the early 90s.
To my fellow Americans and citizens of all countries..here is the best warning ever given about exactly what is happening right now and it's affects on the US, the Arab world and indeed the entire world...all people in all countries would do well to note this lesson.
"So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils 7 Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests."
Washington's Farewell Address 1796
pass it on...
Post a Comment
<< Home