Don't forget the Butcher. He deserves dishonorable mention.

On Nov 10, 6:51 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> Netanyahu: Intellectual Father of the ‘War on Terror’byThomas Harrington, 
> November 10, 2010
> Writing last week onAntiwar.comthe redoubtable Phil Giraldi said:“The Israel 
> connection is significant because Israel has long been at the heart of 
> America’s foreign policy woes. America’s misguided war on terror is in fact a 
> complete adoption of Israeli security paradigms without any regard for the 
> actual threats that confront the U.S., making Israel’s many enemies also the 
> foes of Washington. The Israeli Lobby might not have singlehandedly brought 
> about the disastrous Iraq war, but it certainly was a major factor in the 
> push to invade, taking its cues from the Israeli Foreign Ministry.”Reading 
> Giraldi’s article I thought back, as I have intermittently through the years, 
> to a late night in 1995 when, after a long day’s work, I sat down to watch 
> theCharlie Rose Showin the hopes of getting smarter. Back then, I had not yet 
> realized just how bought-and-paid-for Charlie is (Bloomberg, Sumner Redstone, 
> and a long et cetera of media magnates underwrite his program) and thus 
> incapable of considering ideas that challenge in any substantial way the 
> notion that the U.S. and Israel are anything but positive factors on the 
> world stage.
> In my mind’s eye, I remembered seeing that night’s guest, Benjamin Netanyahu, 
> talk about a book he had written in which he argued for the need of the 
> “West” to engage in a “War on Terror.” I also remember quite clearly 
> chortling out loud at the stupidity and chutzpah of the proposition.
> Well, I recently went back through the online archives of the program and 
> found theinterview. And sure enough, it was exactly as I had remembered it. 
> There was Netanyahu pushing the “War on Terror” as a concept, some six years 
> before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001!
> I don’t know about you, but I was truly amazed at the alacrity with which the 
> concept of the “War on Terror,” and with it, the thousand some-odd page 
> PATRIOT Act was rolled out in the wake of the attacks on the Twin Towers. 
> There was no way, I thought then, and I think now, that this stuff was not 
> sitting there in fairly finished form on the shelves of some very high-level 
> White House offices.
> It seems Netanyahu or people very close to him might very well have placed it 
> there.
> Netanyahu’s father, Benzion Netanyahu, still alive at 102, is one of the 
> major standard-bearers of Revisionist Zionism, an explicitly expansionist, 
> militaristic, and anti-Arab form of Israeli nationalism founded by Ze’ev 
> Jabotinsky in the early part of the 20th century. Given its attraction to 
> energetic action and expansionism, it is not surprising that the movement 
> should have been attracted to Fascism during the Thirties. Indeed, an 
> important member of Revisionist Zionism’s Palestine-based guerrilla arm, Abba 
> Ahimeir, a great fan of Mussolini, also expressed admiration for Hitler, 
> saying in 1932, “Were it not for Hitler’s anti-Semitism, we would not oppose 
> his ideology. Hitler saved Germany.”
> After the Second World War, the Revisionists formed guerrilla gangs aimed at 
> terrorizing both the British and the Palestinian natives out of what they saw 
> as their land. Among the members of these cells were Menachem Begin, Yitzhak 
> Shamir, Dalck Feith (Douglas Feith’s father), and Benjamin Emanuel (Rahm 
> Emanuel’s father).
> Emanuel’s father, living comfortably in retirement in Chicago, was 
> responsible, according to some sources, for terrorist attacks on buses full 
> of Arabs and of British soldiers in the 1945-48 period. Feith’s father was 
> similarly involved in campaigns to induce terror among non-Jewish residents 
> of Palestine prior to his emigration to the U.S. in 1942.
> This gives us some context in which to interpretBenjamin Emanuel’s remarkson 
> the accession of his son to the role of White House chief of staff: 
> “Obviously, he’ll influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? 
> What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”
> After Israeli independence in 1948, the internal politics of the country were 
> dominated by the Labor Party, which believed in the creation of 
> European-style social democracy and a relatively discreet 
> maltreatment/dispossession of Palestinians. In this context, the Revisionists 
> were considered to be nuts from the fringe, and as such, were largely cut out 
> of the structures of official power. I have been told by an Israeli academic 
> that this contributed to Netanyahu’s father, a scholar of the Spanish 
> Inquisition who had also been Jabotinsky’s personal secretary in New York 
> between 1935-1940, having difficulties in securing a regular academic 
> appointment in Eretz Israel. Hence, he shuttled back and forth several times 
> between that country and the U.S. This is the reason why Benjamin Netanyahu 
> speaks perfect American English; he spent much of his youth in the U.S.
> This all changed in 1977 when Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir of the Likud 
> Party, a formation rooted deeply in the beliefs of Revisionist Zionism, got 
> elected to power in Israel. They did so, in no small measure, on the basis of 
> their ability to sell their expansionist form of nationalism to the country’s 
> new wave of immigrants, Sephardic Jews from Arab and/or Islamic countries 
> such as Morocco, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen, who tended to be of considerably 
> lower educational levels than the European Jews who had made up the bulk of 
> the country’s first and second generations of settlers.
> Revisionist Zionism’s long walk in the desert was over. Indeed, since that 
> time, the Revisionists have steadily increased their domination over Israeli 
> political life to the point where the Labor Party, like the Democratic Party 
> in the U.S., spends much of its life cowering in front of the Likud Partyout 
> of fear of being called “unpatriotic” and “soft on terror.”
> Key to the continued rise of Revisionist Zionism was the ability to organize 
> key elements of American Jewry around this new, hyper-martial view of the 
> Israeli reality. They did so by infiltrating AIPAC and by flooding the 
> think-tanks then being created to prop up the Reagan Revolution (e.g., the 
> Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute) with thinkers 
> amenable to their cause, and by founding think-tanks of their own (e.g., the 
> Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the Hudson Institute, the Center 
> for Security Policy, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the 
> Middle East Media Research Institute) dedicated wholeheartedly to promoting a 
> pro-Likud approach to Mideast policy.
> If you were a viewer of theMcNeil Lehrer Reportin the ’80s, you saw the first 
> fruits of this propaganda push in abundance when think-tank heroes, Reagan 
> appointees, and Likud sympathizers such as Michael Ledeen, Richard Perle, 
> Elliot Abrams, and Paul Wolfowitz were paraded across our screens almost 
> nightly to ply their bellicose, Israel-centered view of the world to people 
> (PBS viewers) who like to think of themselves as America’s thinking elite. 
> All polite, articulate, and calmly spoken, they made “muscular foreign 
> policy” and the “show ‘em who’s boss” treatment of Arabs (and all of the 
> other ungrateful brown people of Earth, for that matter) seem the most 
> natural and sensible thing in the world.
> During the Clinton years, these neocons largely retreated into the 
> think-tanks to plan their next assault on power, letting less overtly 
> bellicose pro-Israel types such as Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk (the U.S. 
> correlates of the Laborites Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres) manage Mideast 
> affairs for the Clinton administration.
> The major concern of the Revisionist Zionists-cum-neocons at this point 
> became the Peace Treaty signed by Rabin and Arafat in late 1993. They 
> understood quite rightly that if it were allowed to go into full effect, it 
> would spell the end of the core Revisionist Zionist mission of having Israel 
> occupy all of the “historic lands” of Israel on both sides of the Jordan 
> River.
> So the now well-installed members of the Washington media elite, in 
> coordination with their friend and intellectual first cousin Netanyahu – ever 
> mindful of fulfilling his father’s dreams– went to work on undermining 
> compliance with the treaty and portraying it in the U.S. media as a sellout 
> for Israeli interests. It was in this context that Netanyahu authored the 
> bookFighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat Domestic and International 
> Terrorists, which he is promoting in the Charlie Rose clip mentioned above.
> In the interview, and even more so in the book, you will hear spelled out 
> most of the conceptual building blocks of what was later to become the U.S. 
> “War on Terror.”
> A more synthetic rendering of the vision can be found in the“Clean Break” 
> paperwritten a year later (1996) as a policy blueprint for Netanyahu’s 
> incoming prime ministership by a team that included Feith, Perle, and the 
> husband and wife team of David (Heritage Foundation) and Meyrav (founder of 
> MEMRI and the author of a Ph.D. thesis on Revisionist Zionism) Wurmser, which 
> highlighted the need to engage in preemptive strikes against Iran and Syria, 
> the removal of Saddam Hussein from Iraq, and the abandonment of the 
> traditional “land for peace” framework for negotiations with the Palestinians.
> Hmm. Sound familiar? It should.
> This is exactly the plan rolled out within days of the attacks of 9/11, when 
> all of the people mentioned above, except for Meyrav Wurmser, plus 
> like-minded, pro-Likud figures such as Abe Shulsky, Eliot Cohen, and Dov 
> Zakheim had key positions in the Bush administration, having been inviteden 
> masseby Dick Cheney.
> Does anyone else remember the visit to Washington of Netanyahu two weeks 
> after 9/11? He was greeted by official Washington as a hero and gave speeches 
> before Congress and elsewhere in which, barely hiding his glee, he advocated 
> the need to pursue the “War on Terror” and how, thankfully, the U.S. and 
> Israel were now all in this together.
> Mission accomplished. The U.S. and Israel were now joined at the hip on the 
> basis of a lunatic paradigm, the “War on Terror” Netanyahu and his friends 
> developed as a way, first and foremost, of pursuing Revisionist Zionism’s 
> expansionist dreams. If you have any doubt, take a look at Netanyahuholding 
> court among West Bank settlers and mocking the U.S.just weeks before we 
> signed on to his “all for one and one for all” dream of endless war on people 
> who are rightly his enemies but not necessarily ours.
> Future historians will marvel at these developments and wonder how the 
> world’s most powerful nation allowed it to happen without any serious public 
> debate or 
> reaction.http://original.antiwar.com/thomas-harrington/2010/11/09/netanyahu-intellectual-father/

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to