Tuesday, 22 May 2012


On 20 September 2001, 9 days after the 9/11 attacks, PNAC sent the Letter of 41 to George W. Bush.

This is it:

"We agree with Secretary of State Powell’s recent statement that Saddam Hussein ‘is one of the leading terrorists on the face of the Earth.’ It may be that the Iraqi government provided assistance in some form to the recent attack on the United States. But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism. The United States must therefore provide full military and financial support to the Iraqi opposition… And American forces must be prepared to back up our commitment to the Iraqi opposition by all necessary means…

Israel has been and remains America’s staunchest ally against international terrorism, especially in the Middle East. The United States should fully support our fellow democracy in its fight against terrorism… Until the Palestinian Authority moves against terror, the United States should provide it no further assistance.

A serious and victorious war on terrorism will require a large increase in defence spending… We urge that there be no hesitation in requesting whatever funds for defence are needed to allow us to win this war."
Charles Hill; Bruce P. Jackson; Michael Joyce; Seth Cropsey; Francis Fukuyama; Thomas Donnelly; Randy Scheunemann; Jeane Kirkpatrick; Richard H. Shultz; Gary Schmitt; William Schneider; Henry Sokolski; Vin Weber; Clifford May; Richard V. Allen; Gary Bauer; Jeffrey Bell; William J. Bennett.

I'm not sure if any of the above have Hebrew antecedents but the following are all Jewish:

William Kristol; Rudy Boshwitz; Jeffrey Bergner; Eliot Cohen; Midge Decter; Nicholas Eberstadt; Hillel Fradkin; Aaron Friedberg; Frank Gaffney; Jeffrey Gedmin; Reuel Marc Gerecht; Eli S. Jacobs; Donald Kagan; Robert Kagan; Stephen J. Solarz; Leon Wieseltier; Marshall Wittmann; Charles Krauthammer; John Lehman; Martin Peretz; Richard Perle; Norman Podhoretz; Stephen P. Rosen.

Of the 32 prominent signers of the letter above, only four had any military experience. And three of them were well out of harm's way in the reserves.

None of the Jews mentioned ever saw combat, although almost all of them were old enough to have served in Vietnam if they had been of a mind to do so. Ironically, Richard Perle, who escaped the Vietnam draft by enrolling at the University of Chicago, would later joined the staff of Senator Henry Jackson, the last Democrat in the Senate who enthusiastically supported that dreadful war.

George W. Bush himself, instead of being drafted for the war, received a posting to the Texas National Guard. Dick Cheney managed to avoid the call-up altogether.

Cheney’s Chief of Staff, I. Lewis Libby, spent the Vietnam War at university. Donald Rumsfeld’s top deputies, Paul Wolfowitz and Peter Rodman, were similarly engaged, while Dougas Feith, the Pentagon’s most enthusiastic hawk, enrolled in law school.

National Security Council adviser, Elliott Abrams, and Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Strategy, Perle's protegé, Frank Gaffney, head of the Center for Security Policy, also avoided military service during Vietnam.

Here's an interesting thing: though many of these Neoconservative Jewish warmongers were anti-Vietnam, when the possibility existed that they might have to put their own lives on the line, NONE of them ever said an uncomplimentary dickiebird about the massive Israeli onslaught upon its neighbours in 1967. The Six-Day-War, unlike Vietnam, was never an issue for the 1960s student radical.

On 24 September 2001, British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, wrote an article for an Iranian newspaper, ahead of his visit to Iran the following day. In this article, Straw wrote:

"One of the factors that helps breed terrorism is the anger which many people in this region feel at events over the years in Palestine."
Which is as baldly accurate a statement of fact as you were ever going to get from a New Labour politician. This particular truth, however, caused a furore in Israel.

On 26 September 2001, The Guardian reported thus:

"Tony Blair was forced to intervene personally to rescue Jack Straw from a diplomatic storm yesterday when the furious Israeli prime minister and president refused to meet him. It took a 15-minute phone call with Mr Blair to persuade Ariel Sharon to reverse his ban…Aides to Mr Sharon said the meetings were only going ahead out of goodwill towards Mr Blair, and his consistent support of Israel…

The sources of the imbroglio are an article Mr Straw wrote for an Iranian newspaper… and comments which do not subscribe to Israel's view that the attacks on the US and the year of upheaval in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are part of a global programme of Islamist terror.

An Israeli cabinet minister, Ephraim Sneh, described the comments as 'pornographic'... Downing St swiftly distanced itself from Mr Straw's remarks…

The Israeli president, Moshe Katzav, declined to receive him, on the advice of Mr Sharon's office, and Mr Peres cancelled last night's formal banquet…
The foreign secretary's efforts to defuse the controversy earlier yesterday made the Israelis even angrier.

In his condemnation of the killing of an Israeli woman in a drive-by shooting in the West Bank, the foreign secretary said: 'There is an obvious need to understand the environment in which terrorism breeds. That is why the whole of the international community is so concerned to see a lasting peace in the Middle East'…

Israeli foreign ministry officials are also furious at a report in the Guardian in which a senior official referred to Mr Sharon as a 'cancer' blocking peace efforts."
In the Iranian article, obliquely referring to the likelihood of future aggression against the Muslim world, Straw also said:

"Tony Blair and other world leaders have made clear that this is not remotely a war against Islam. My own constituency in England has over 25,000 people of the Muslim faith (and 23 mosques)."
Thus does a warmonger distance himself from the negative effects of any future aggression whilst attempting to curry favour with his hosts and his own Asian constituents at the same time.

25,000 Asians in Blackburn. Do you think the British inhabitants of this northern town are happy to have had 25,000 people, whose attitudes, behaviour and culture was so different to their own, forced upon them over the last few years?

You do? You must lives in a leafy, white suburb. Or perhaps you're a recent immigrant.

On 24 September 2001, the Jewish Board of British Deputies released this statement:

"Jo Wagerman has decried this apparent attempt to link Israeli policy with the atrocities committed against the United States on 11 September. She wrote… 'Such a statement by the British Foreign secretary gives credence to the anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish propaganda currently being circulated by the enemies of Israel…

British Jews are increasingly being victimised as a result of disinformation and propaganda spread by the pro-Palestinian lobby'. Mrs Wagerman also urged caution in the Government’s policy toward Iran. Jack Straw’s statement condemns the Taliban’s support for terrorism but makes no mention of the similar role adopted by Iran.

She wrote: 'Iran currently heads the US’s list of states which sponsor terrorism. This in part because of its support for the fundamentalist Hezbollah party in Lebanon.'

She also referred to Iran’s public backing for the Palestinian terrorist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad… Jo Wagerman has asked for a meeting with Jack Straw in order to discuss the community’s concerns over the Government’s Middle East Policy."
Apart from being the big cheese at the Board of British Deputies, Jo Wagerman, was also a member of the Inner Cities Religious Council, which advises the Government.

She is on record as saying:

"I had a mother who was anti-Semitic, abusive, neglectful and everything a Jewish mother shouldn’t be. She gave me away when I was nine months old. But she was such a violent woman that she quarreled with whoever was looking after me and I went back to her. We were dirty, we were often very hungry, and we were badly knocked about."
So, it's not just me, folks. Jews themselves are on record telling the world that other Jews are capable of extremely inpleasant behaviour.

A Jewish mother 'badly knocks about' her kids and gives one of them away when she was nine months old. It's not exactly the picture of Yiddisher Momma that you find in the storybooks, is it?

On 8 April 1998, the BBC reported Gerald Kaufman thus:

"Labour MP Gerald Kaufman is embroiled in a row after describing the Board of Deputies of British Jews as 'pompous', 'ridiculous' and being made up of 'yes-men to Israeli regimes.'

The former Shadow Foreign Secretary and current MP for Manchester Gorton, who is Jewish himself, criticised the board in the wake of the uproar over the present Foreign Secretary Robin Cook's trip to Israel in March. Mr Cook angered Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, by meeting a Palestinian official at the disputed Har Homa settlement in East Jerusalem.
Days later, the Board of Deputies withdrew an invitation for Mr Cook to be guest of honour at their annual president's dinner, partly because of the strength of feeling within the Jewish community over his trip…

Mr Kaufman writes that the 'self-important activists' within the Jewish community know too little of politics. 'Their attitude is that any Israeli government, even an Israeli government as patently vile as Netanyahu's, is always right and must always be supported. Anyone who does not act subserviently to any Israeli government is beyond the pale'."
If a Jew says it, it's 'foolish,' which is what Tony Blair's pal, Eldred Tabachnik, the previous boss of the Board of Deputies, called Kaufman after his outburst. If I say the same thing, it's anti-Semite, racist, Fascist and Nazi. And, if the name-calling and the threats don't work, it's seven years in jail for 'incitement to racial hatred.'

Just for saying what every Jew on the planet is at liberty to say without fear of reprisal.

The extremely influential journalist, William Safire, has earned himself the soubriquet, 'Richard Perle’s mouthpiece in New York'

On 24 September 2001, Safire said this in The New York Times:

"The clear link between the terrorist in hiding and the terrorist in power can be found in Kurdistan, that northern portion of Iraq protected by U.S. and British aircraft from Saddam's savagery.

Kurdish sources tell me (and anyone else who will listen) that the Iraqi dictator has armed and financed a fifth column of Al Qaeda mullahs and terrorists that calls itself the Soldiers of Islam. Its purposes are to assassinate the leaders of free Kurdistan, to sabotage the relief efforts of the U.N. and to whip up religious fervour in that free Muslim region…

Do we recognize now the greater danger of germ warfare or nuclear attack from a proven terrorist nation, and couple expected retribution for this month's attack with a strategy of pre-emptive retaliation? Such use of our superpower need not require our 'going it alone'; civilized nations unafraid of internal revolt will understand the threat to their citizens and stand with us…

But Iraqi scientists today working feverishly in hidden biological laboratories and underground nuclear facilities would, if undisturbed, enable the hate-driven, power-crazed Saddam to kill millions. That capability would transform him from a boxed-in bully into a rampant world power…

Now is the time to work out how to strike down terrorism's boss of all bosses."
On 1 September 1988, Safire had said this in The New York Times:

"The Iraqi (Saddam) trails the Asian [Pol Pot] in the number slaughtered only because his nuclear capability was curtailed by the Israelis."
Whereas, in reality, the Geogian Asiatic, Joseph Stalin trails the Chinaman, Mao Tse-Tung, in the number slaughtered only because he was eliminated (some conspiracy theorists believe) by his own Jewish medical team, who believed that they were for the chop if they didn't hasten the demise of Uncle Joe.

I don't know how many of his own people Saddam killed, although, it is certainly, not more than a million. Technically speaking, of course, the Kurds and the Shi'ites were not 'his own people' as Saddam, himself, was a Sunni. The Kurds and the Shi'ites were also at war with him for some of the time he was attacking them and some of the rest of the time Saddam was engaged in killing those who had sided with his enemies in the Iran-Iraq War and Gulf War I.

As for Pol Pot, he killed about a million-and-a-half of 'his own people'. The Butcher of Baghdad and the Cambodian psychopath are not in the same bloodthirsty league as Stalin, who knocked off about 60 million of 'his own people,' or Mao, who got rid of about 80 million of his. This gruesome twosome were both disciples of Karl Marx, who was as Jewish as William Safire.

On 26 September 2001, the American politician, Pat Buchanan, said this on USA Today:

"The war Netanyahu and the Neocons want, with the United States and Israel fighting all of the radical Islamic states, is the war bin Laden wants, the war his murderers hoped to ignite when they sent those airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon."
On 2 October 2001, at the New Labour Party Conference, Blair said:
"The biggest drugs hoard in the world is in Afghanistan, controlled by the Taleban. Ninety per cent of the heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan. The arms the Taleban are buying today are paid for with the lives of young British people buying their drugs on British streets."
In the same 3 October 2001, Guardian article from which the above quote was extracted, Alan Travis told us this:

"Last year, a Taliban edict banned the growing of opium poppies and UN observers reported that by earlier this year."
It's just possible that Tony B Liar was not outright lying when he said what he said, but he was certainly being deceitful in a major way. Later in his speech TB cosied up to his favourite folk, saying:

"The state of Israel must be given recognition by all".
Then the New World Order's favourite cheerleader regaled us with just about the most classic example of one-world, we-are-one, globalist, our-father-who-art-in-Israel, messianically coded newspeak you will ever hear outside the pages of Orwell, Huxley or the small boy's book of brainwashing, when he said:
"We celebrate the diversity in our country, get strength from the cultures and races that go to make up Britain today… JEWS, MUSLIMS AND CHRISTIANS ARE ALL CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM… This is the moment to bring the faiths closer together… The Kaleidoscope has been shaken. The pieces are in flux… let us re-order this world around us".
At the time that Tony Blair was making his quintissential New World Order speech to the robotic multitudes, there were 6 subsections at the New Labour Party's website, one of which was titled Get Involved. There was a photo at the top of the page which featured 8 recognisable individuals. One presumes that those featured represented the kind of people thatthe Party wished would 'get involved' in their politics and party. Of the 8 individuals shown, there were four black men, a black woman and the remaining three people were young, white women.

There were no white men at all. At the bottom of the same page we were told that the contents of thepage in question were:

"Promoted by David Triesman, General Secretary, the Labour Party".

David Triesman was the General Secretary of the Labour Party from 2001 to 2003. He was also a significant figure in the Euro-communist movement of the 1970s.

In January 2004, after Tony Blair ennobled him, Baron Triesman of Tottenham was given a job as a Whip in the House of Lords almost immediately. Soon after this he was promoted to the position of spokesman in the Lords for the Department for International Development. After which, this quintissential Tony Crony, whom none of us ever elected, went on to become a Minister in the Foreign Office, figuring out what relationship the dumb, British herd ought to have with the rest of the planet.

He now serves as a Foreign Minister in Ed Miliband's Shadow Cabinet.

Both Miliband and Triesman are Jewish

On 14 October 2001, The Observer quoted unnamed US Administration Officials as having said:

"We see this war as one against the virus of terrorism. If you have bone marrow cancer, it's not enough to just cut off the patient's foot. You have to do the complete course of chemotherapy. And if that means embarking on the next Hundred Years' War, that's what we're doing."
Which is pretty heavy duty, don't you think? The Observer described the above Aministration Officials as being 'close to the Defence Policy Advisory Board,' and added:

"The hawks winning the ear of President Bush are assembled around Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, and a think tank, the Defence Policy Advisory Board, dubbed the 'Wolfowitz cabal'."
The Chairman of the Defence Policy Advisory Board at this time was Richard Perle.

The Neoconservative, Jeffrey Gedmin, is the Director of the Aspen Institute and the Executive Director of the New Atlantic Initiative.

He is also a Research Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

On 22 October 2001, The National Review Online quoted Gedmin thus:

"Germany's Green foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, supports the Bush administration, attacks those in his party who support a bombing pause, and wants German troops to stand by the Americans in Afghanistan…

After Afghanistan what's next? They know that Saddam Hussein, for example, was likely involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center, when six were killed and more than 1,000 injured.

Ramzi Yousef, who now serves two life sentences in Colorado for the 1993 attack, is believed to be an Iraqi agent. Abdul Rahman Yasin, another central figure, an indicted fugitive, finds safe haven in Iraq today. One of the perpetrators in last month's attacks had met with Iraqi agents on more than one occasion. Whether conclusive evidence of Saddam's culpability emerges, Europeans also know that the Iraqi dictator is a threat; that he kicked UN arms inspectors out of Iraq three years ago and continues to develops weapons of mass destruction; and that he has motive to harm the US and its allies.

Yes, of course, some will squirm, they will complain… But if America makes the case, they will come along, just as in the Cold War, because they understand that it is in their interest to do so…

When the Europeans say yes, Russia will not wish to be isolated. And that's a coalition. Which means when Afghanistan is finished, is America ready to lead? Or will misguided ideas of ‘leadership by consensus’ squander the biggest foreign-policy opportunity the US has had in a decade?"
Now that’s what you call chutzpah. Or heavyweight spin. Or a bunch of crap. There are so many downright lies in the statement above that it would be laughable but for the fact that most folks would rather believe such obvious hogwash than the truth these days.

Churchill once said that the truth was so important that it must have a bodyguard of lies. The above suggests to me that Rodmin thinks that lies are so important that they must have a bodyguard of bullshit.

On 29 September 2002, in USA Today, Gedmin castigates the Germans for not wishing to join the US coalition against Iraq. He determined that this reluctance had come about as a result of three things:

1) "A rise in German nationalism in the post-Cold War period". (i.e. Nazi Krauts)
2) "A strong sense of pacifism among a large segment of the public." (i.e. Lily-livered Krauts)
3) "A growing resentment of the United States, which has emerged as the world's lone superpower". (i.e. Ungrateful, envious, powerless Krauts) Gedmin then says that these things, "feed an inferiority complex many Germans have."
So, according to this Jew, Krauts are inferior. Nothing new there, then. Interesting, isn't it, that 'Germany's Green foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, supported the Bush administration, attacked those in his party who supported a bombing pause and wanted German troops to stand by the Americans in Afghanistan.'

Of course, it does help if the 'foreign minister in question happens to be a Jew. I mean, whose side is a Jew going to be on when the Jews go to war, for goodness sake!

I shouldn't be so disparaging of Mr. Gedmin. He certainly got it right when he said:

"Some will squirm, they will complain… But if America makes the case, they will come along".
Germany squirmed, France complained and Tony Blair came along.

On 23 October 2001, at the National Convention of the American Jewish Congress, the Deputy Defence Minister, Paul Wolfowitz, said.

"A victory over terrorism… will make the world safer for Israel…

We cannot have a victory if we make a coalition that sacrifices the interests of some for the interests of others.. Ultimately the mission will determine the coalition the coalition will not determine the mission… We are not going just to pluck off individual snakes; we intend to drain the entire swamp…

Working with Israel and moderate Arab states, we must do all we can to promote peace in the Middle East."
On the 23 of October 2001, Joseph Sobran, the American journalist, author and poliitical analyst, reported thus:

"One reason the Middle East has always baffled me is that we hear such contradictory things about the state of Israel. Israel’s defenders make it sound like heaven; its detractors make it sound like hell. On the one hand, its citizens, including Arabs, enjoy liberties denied by most states in the region; on the other hand, it deals harshly and cruelly with non-Jews, especially in the occupied territories.

A Christian has to be particularly disturbed by the recent killings of innocent Christians, including children, in Bethlehem, the birthplace of Christ. The exact circumstances are unclear, because our news media don’t report much on the plight of Christians in the region; but it’s hard to believe these violent deaths were unavoidable. Were they inflicted by weapons supplied by the United States?

The question is not whether Israel is heaven or hell; it’s neither. It’s a deeply troubled country, and the real question, for Americans, is whether the fate of the United States should be tied to it. It’s understandable that the Israelis should want U.S. support; but what is the cost to Americans? There is the monetary cost, in billions of tax dollars per year; there is the hatred of this country that is exacerbated, if not wholly caused, by the US-Israel alliance; and that hatred has now cost thousands of American lives, with the toll rising.

It would be one thing if Israel’s American advocates frankly admitted the costs and argued that America has nevertheless gained more than it has lost by the alliance. But they don’t. They talk as if the alliance has been all profit to this country, with no downside. They contend that the 9/11 attacks had little or nothing to do with the US-Israel alliance.

Some of Israel’s advocates are even arguing, as former Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu does, that Arabs hate Israel because of the United States, and not vice versa! Even by the standards of political propaganda, which assumes the stupidity of the masses, this is absurd. If it were true, the Israelis would end their ties to the United States in a flash.

A decade ago, Patrick Buchanan was accused of anti-Semitism for referring to Israel’s 'amen corner in this country.' But nobody denied that such an Amen Corner exists, including many journalists, Christian as well as Jewish, who constantly urge the United States to go to war against Israel’s enemies — especially, at the moment, Iraq.

To acknowledge this is to incur the charge of raising 'the canard of dual loyalty.' Now it would be grossly unfair to accuse all American Jews of giving their chief loyalty to Israel. But that some Jews do it is beyond question.

What is the pro-Israel lobby in this country seeking, if not at least the partial sacrifice of American interests to Israeli interests? That’s what lobbies are for: sacrificing general interests to particular interests. Farmers’ lobbies do it, labor unions do it, big corporations do it. They always pretend that what is good for the narrow interest is good for everyone, just as the pro-Israel lobby always argues that what is good for Israel is good for America. The pro-Israel lobby never acknowledges that there may be sharp divergences between the two countries’ interests.

Having read its literature for many years, I can’t recall a single case when Israel’s advocates have said: 'Policy X would be to Israel’s advantage, but it would hurt the United States, so it should be avoided'...

Worse than the pro-Israel lobby itself are the American politicians who constantly pander to it. They act on the assumption that Jewish voters and campaign donors place Israeli interests above American interests. And as long as they act on this assumption without putting it into words, nobody comments on the 'anti-Semitic' implications of their behaving as if the 'canard' were solid fact. Even when the Israelis kill American sailors or steal American military secrets, these fine Americans never express outrage or demand investigations.

Nothing could better illustrate the sagacity of George Washington’s warnings against the 'foreign corruption' to which republics are susceptible. Israel has become so dependent on American aid that even to ask for candor about the interests at stake is to risk the charge of being 'anti-Israel', as if seeking the unvarnished truth amounted to declaring war on Israel."
In November 2001, the top man at the Bilderberger organisation, former US Secretary of State and all round New World Order big shot, Henry Kissinger, praised the special relationship between Britain and the US and applauded Tony Blair for his support.

At the Ruttenberg Lecture, given at the Centre for Policy Studies in London, Kissinger encouraged the destruction of the regime in Afghanistan, saying:

"There cannot be an ambiguous outcome to the war in Afghanistan. The Taliban has to be eliminated and bin Laden and his network has to be unambiguously destroyed…

I know of no other leaders that have so identified the experiences of New York and Washington with the attitudes of their own people as those of the British government… There is still a very special attitude in the relationship between our two countries, and this relationship should be preserved in the years ahead and for the challenges that are clearly facing us".
Invoking the spirit of Pearl Harbour, Kissinger then gave World Government a plug:
"This is what has generated this extraordinary sense of unity that I have never seen in America, not even after Pearl Harbor. We have the same opportunity as the leaders who created the post war world between 1945 and 1950, but we have got to get the sequence straight. We have to defeat the enemies and then we will be able to create a community of nations."
Henry Kissinger, born Avraham ben Eliezer in Germany, was the Secretary of State during the Presidencies of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. He is a member of the Defence Policy Board, the Council on Foreign Relations and is a Hollinger shareholder. Hollinger owned The Daily Telegraph and many other media outlets during the time that the Canadian Zionist, Conrad Black was at the helm.

Kissinger, who has been the most powerful Bilderberger for the last two decades, is closely connected to the Rockefeller family. In 1971, he was appointed National Security Adviser in the Nixon administration. According to a US News World Report this 'was on the advice of Governor Rockefeller, who described Mr. Kissinger as "the smartest guy available.'

The Rockefellers, who are, probably, along with the Rothschilds, the most powerful political family on earth, have a deal of Jewish blood in their pedigree. In 1957, Kissinger said:

"With proper tactics, nuclear war need not be as destructive as it appears."
In US National Security Memorandum 200, which was de-classified in 1990, Kissinger is on record as having said:

"De-population should be the highest priority of US foreign policy towards the Third World… Reduction of the rate of population in these States is a matter of vital US national security… The US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries."
Describing his feelings towards the Marshall Islands, which include Bikini and Enewetak Atolls, sites of at least 66 full scale US nuclear bomb tests, Kissinger once said:

"There are only 90,000 people out there, who gives a damn?"
Kissinger's explanation before Congress, regarding the CIA's 1973 overthrow of the democratic government in Chile, in which the President, Salvador Allende had been killed, is recorded thus:
"The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."
Describing his feelings towards the people of Chile, Kissinger has said:
"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people".

"Chile should not be allowed to go Marxist just because its people are irresponsible."
Kissinger and Nixon were responsible for the massive bombing of Cambodia in 1973, which killed three-quarters of a million peasants and disrupted Cambodian society, setting the stage for Pol Pot to come to power and ultimately kill another one-and-a-half million more. Of this period in history, Kissinger has said:

"Why should we flagellate ourselves for what the Cambodians did to each other?"
In a 7 March 1999, interview with Leslie Stahl on the CBS news program 60 Minutes, Kissinger was asked:

"The secret bombings in Cambodia, do you regret this today?"
He replied:

"No… On the main lines of our policy, I wouldn't change anything."
The 14 August 1997 edition of the Greek magazine, Economicos Tachidromos, quoted Kissinger as saying this in an interview in Munich with Greek host, Pavlo Bakoyianni:

"The Greek people are anarchic and difficult to tame. For this reason we must strike deep into their cultural roots, perhaps then we can force them to conform, I mean, of course, to strike at their language, religion, their cultural and historical reserves so that we can neutralise their ability to develop, to distinguish themselves or to prevail. Thereby removing them as anobstacle to our strategically vital plans in the Balkans, the Mediterranean and the Middle East."
A chapter in Kissinger’s book 1975 book, On the Creation of a Just World Order, is titled:

"World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions".
In April 1975, after America’s hurried exit from Vietnam, The Washington Post quoted Kissinger thus:

"The US must carry out some act somewhere in the world which shows its’ determination to continue to be a world power."
In October 1975, before the General Assembly of the United Nations, Kissinger said:

"We say to all peoples and governments: let us fashion together a New World Order."
In the 1976 book, The Final Days, by Woodward and Bernstein, Kissinger is quoted thus:

"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."
In the book, Law and Politics, Kissinger is quoted thus:
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a bit longer."
Describing the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, Kissinger said:
"What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system... a first step toward a New World Order."
In March 1994, Time Magazine quoted this excerpt from a Kissinger book:
"How to Achieve The New World Order."
In December 1997, The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, quoted Kissinger as having recommended that Israel put down the Palestinian uprising: 'as quickly as possible, overwhelmingly, brutally and rapidly.' Kissinger then added:

"The insurrection must be quelled immediately, and the first step should be to throw out television, a la South Africa. To be sure, there will be international criticism of the step, but it will dissipate in short order. There are no awards for losing with moderation."
In his year 2000 book, The Jewish Phenomenon. Seven Keys to the Enduring Wealth of a People, Jewish author, Steven Silbiger, says of Henry Kissinger:

"During Israel’s first years as a nation the United States offered it very little financial or military aid. The huge influx of direct aid occurred during the Nixon administration in the 1970s under the leadership of Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, the first Jew to hold the position. Aid skyrocketed from $300 million to $2.2 billion annually, making Israel the recipient of more US dollars than any other nation."
In the March/April 2003, edition of the Mother Jones magazine, we read:

"Ever since the oil shocks of the 1970s, the United States has steadily been accumulating military muscle in the Gulf by building bases, selling weaponry, and forging military partnerships. Now, it is poised to consolidate its might in a place that will be a fulcrum of the world's balance of power for decades to come.

At a stroke, by taking control of Iraq, the Bush administration can solidify a long-running strategic design.

‘It's the Kissinger plan,’ says James Akins, a former US diplomat. ‘I thought it had been killed, but it's back.’

Akins learned a hard lesson about the politics of oil when he served as a US envoy in Kuwait and Iraq, and ultimately as ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the oil crisis of 1973 and '74. At his home in Washington, D.C., shelves filled with Middle Eastern pottery and other memorabilia cover the walls, souvenirs of his years in the Foreign Service. Nearly three decades later, he still gets worked up while recalling his first encounter with the idea that the United States should be prepared to occupy Arab oil-producing countries.

In 1975, while Akins was ambassador in Saudi Arabia, an article headlined "Seizing Arab Oil" appeared in ‘Harper's.’ The author, who used the pseudonym Miles Ignotus, was identified as: ‘A Washington-based professor and defense consultant with intimate links to high-level US policymakers.’ The article outlined, as Akins puts it: ‘How we could solve all our economic and political problems by taking over the Arab oil fields [and] bringing in Texans and Oklahomans to operate them.’ Simultaneously, a rash of similar stories appeared in other magazines and newspapers. ‘I knew that it had to have been the result of a deep background briefing," Akins says.

‘You don't have eight people coming up with the same screwy idea at the same time, independently. Then I made a fatal mistake,’ Akins continues.
‘I said on television that anyone who would propose that is either a madman, a criminal, or an agent of the Soviet Union.’

Soon afterward, he says, he learned that the background briefing had been conducted by his boss, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Akins was fired later that year. Kissinger has never acknowledged having planted the seeds for the article. But in an interview with ‘Business Week’ that same year, he delivered a thinly veiled threat to the Saudis, musing about bringing oil prices down through 'massive political warfare against countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran to make them risk their political stability and maybe their security if they did not cooperate.’

In the 1970s, America's military presence in the Gulf was virtually nil, so the idea of seizing control of its oil was a pipe dream. Still, starting with the Miles Ignotus-article, and a parallel one by conservative strategist and Johns Hopkins University professor Robert W. Tucker in ‘Commentary,’ the idea began to gain favor among a feisty group of hardline, pro-Israeli thinkers...

Eventually, this amalgam of strategists came to be known as ‘neoconservatives,’ and they played important roles in President Reagan's Defense Department and at think tanks and academic policy centers in the 1980s. Led by Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's influential Defense Policy Board, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, they now occupy several dozen key posts in the White House, the Pentagon, and the State Department.

At the top, they are closest to Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who have been closely aligned since both men served in the White House under President Ford in the mid-1970s. They also clustered around Cheney when he served as secretary of defense during the Gulf War in 1991.

Throughout those years, and especially after the Gulf War, US forces have steadily encroached on the Gulf and the surrounding region, from the Horn of Africa to Central Asia. In preparing for an invasion and occupation of Iraq, the administration has been building on the steps taken by military and policy planners over the past quarter century."
I don't know about you, but I would find it difficult to describe a bloke who could say the things Kissinger has said over the years as a nice chap. On the other hand, I would find it quite easy to describe him as a genocidal megalomaniac.

What you have to remember, folks, is that this a***hole has been just about the most powerful man on earth for more than thirty-five years now. Deciding OUR lives, deciding the present wellbeing and future possibilities for us and all of OUR children.

Now tell me the truth, would you let this Jew, in whose presence Tony Blair would wag his sweaty, little behind just as furiously as he possibly could, baby-sit your kids?

Henry Kissinger has never seen combat in war.

Next section...

No comments:

Post a Comment