« The Constituency That Counts | Main | "Mugged by Reality" »

14 March 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Chris Marlowe

After America's resounding victories in Iraq and Afghanistan, anyone who even contemplates peace is a wimp, according to this story:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/mar/17/susan_estrich_on_hillary_obama_and_israel

Maybe that should be the new Cheney/Cohen slogan for Fox News and Tim Russert: PEACE IS FOR COWARDS!

James Pratt

The pro-Israel anti-Arab neocon front was only a third of the IOF cheerleader triad:
the other two would rather we didn't realize what they were up to, even though there is plenty of evidence. Big Oil has been the counterpart to George Soros and his beneficiaries at MoveOn but without Mr. Soros' candor.
Many pro-war politicians and foundations receive much of their funding from them, the former CEO of Exxon Mobil is the vice chairman of AEI.
The other one is the government of Iran and its allies in Dawa, SCIRI and Kurdistan. The Iranians play to the Shi'ite public by denouncing the US invasion
but Green Zone Shi'ite advocates of America staying to fight the Sunni insurgency are always welcome in Tehran.

Clifford Kiracofe

Per JP's observation on oil: One indicator will be the fate of Iraq's hydrocarbons. We will have to await the finalizing of Iraq's petroleum laws and then analyze the players and the moves they make. Also, what about former French, Russian, and Chinese stakes there?

The analysis is complex as one has to take into account ownership patterns of the companies involved as well as the financing of the companies and their projects.

On the financing side, we can note the presence over the past century of prestigious "Jewish" banking houses with respect to ownership of oil companies and their financing. This includes shipping as well such as involved the French Banque Worms group who serviced Shell in the old days. And the Worms group had relations with the Banque Lazard folks in London, Paris, and New York. These interlocked with some of the Harriman interests and one might even infer involved the Bush family (on the Walker side.)

One early French study of the industry pointed this situation out with reference to the Rothschild interests and others. See in translation,Pierre l"Espagnol de la Tramerye, The World-Struggle for Oil (New York: Knopf, 1924). Another useful book is the sympathetic biography of Viscount Bearsted (Marcus Samuel). Robert Henriques, Marcus Samuel. First Viscount Bearsted and founder of the Shell Transport and Trading Compnay 1853-1927 (London: Barrie and Rockliff 1960).

As JP rightly notes, Exxon-Mobil is represented at AEI. Yes indeed and the Chairman of AEI, New York financier Bruce Kovner, is linked to the French Rothschilds as New York Magazine reports.
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/12353/
Small world.

As I recall, back during the Iran-Iraq War certain major US oil companies had their representatives at the table in the US government's inter-agency policy process concerning the war. This would be logical.

Dr. Clifford Kiracofe

Chris Marlowe

Economist article on AIPAC:

http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?story_id=8861497

Sandy

It's just hard for me to imagine there is any Democrat quite as bad....or as scummy....as this guy:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/tom-delay-tome-of-the-un_b_43593.html

Clifford Kiracofe

CM thanks for the heads up on Economist article. Given the "Balfour Declaration," and all the rest of their internal politics, I suppose the Brits don't need an AIPAC. The first Zionist project after Napoleon's was Palmerston's. Herzl comes decades later.

Per Dems and AIPAC: Wayne Madsen reported March 7 as follows,
"The schism within the Democratic Party appeared when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to allow ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Jane Harman of California to become chairman. Pelosi was backed by powerful House Defense Appropriations Committee chairman John Murtha. That set off a battle for the House Majority Leader position between Murtha and Steny Hoyer of Maryland. Hoyer handily won the election while Pelosi supported Murtha. Hoyer's sister, Bernice Manocherian, has served as an executive president of AIPAC."
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

Looking at the House of Representatives over the past few years: Richard Armey, Christian Zionist; Tom DeLay, Christian Zionist; Roy Blunt, Christian Zionist; Boehner, "pro-Israel;" Pelosi is described in some quarters as "second generation pro-Israel" whatever that may mean. Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs is Tom Lantos, straight ahead Zionist.

plp

"3. Therefore American Jews need to find other political allies, another bloc. The rise of the Moral Majority and Christian Fundamentalist Right offers such an opportunity. Because such Christian Zionist groups are "vigorously pro-Israel" it makes sense to form a political alliance with them despite what Jews may think of their theology generally."

Dr. Kiracofe:

But this is just a smoke screen and redirection. Republicans exploit Evangelical Christians too only over the issue of abortion. The key alliance is elsewhere of course. Engaging conservative Christians would be a “proxy” conflict.

I started some reading on the circumstances surrounding the ouster of Trotsky from Russia in the 1920s. Fascinating stuff. Aside the fact that he tried to institute a military style labor system in which workers would essentially become slaves of the state, he was driven out over the issue of “reinterpreting” to distortion the events surrounding the Russian revolution and early Soviet policies. Apparently, he argued that terrorism was an essential tool critical to brining about the revolution and that revolutionary leaders, starting with Lenin, saw it as a readily available “cure all”. Of course, this was not true, in fact the opposite was true. Perhaps, Trotsky intended to “spread world revolution” by means of terror and attempted to convince his comrades that they have always been terrorist, sort of like now we are being convinced that America has always been an empire. Taking this as a template, a more effective approach would be perhaps to revisit the meaning of the American democracy.

Clifford Kiracofe

PLP per Trotsky: The early Neoconservative first generation types like Irving Kristol pre-World War II were Trotskyists. This was the culture of their circle (so-called "New York Intellectuals") at City College of New York. Refer to the PBS show on this topic noting Irving Kristol for example.
http://www.pbs.org/arguing/index.html

After World War II, Kristol and friends became Cold War Zionists clustering around Commentary Magazine.

So the Neoconservatives may well have some elements of Trotskyism, "permanent revolution," and all that in them.

In terms of Russian influence, however, I would give a careful look to Alexandre Kojeve, a very dark "postmodern" intellectual based in Paris. Kojeve was a major influence on Allen Bloom, Paul Wolfowitz's guru for example. Lots of Hegel and Nietzsche and the like here. See, Shadia Drury, Alexandre Kojeve, The Roots of Postmodern Politics (New York: St. Martins, 1994).

Now all of this seems to be part and parcel of the Republican Party's ideology and policy owing to the Neocon penetration that began mostly during the Reagan years. But Pat Moynihan did penetrate the Nixon Administration.

Chris Marlowe

George Soros' article in the NY Review of Books:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20030

Clifford Kiracofe

CM per Soros article: excellent article. I think the operative sentence is "Whether the Democratic Party can liberate itself from AIPAC's influence is highly doubtful." Pelosi is a case in point. Same applies to the Republican Party these days although perhaps another Ike could emerge and do a Suez.

Seems to me Soros on the "left" and Bruce Kovner on the "right" are a classic Mut and Jeff/good guy, bad guy operation. The Soros crowd is worried about the time when the American public finally connects the dots between the Israel Lobby, the Iraq War, and many other significant policy issues. The usual pattern in history would suggest a negative reaction to the Lobby is building. More wasted blood and treasure out in the Middle East, however, may move the process along.

Clifford Kiracofe

CM per Soros article: here are two that add to the points he makes, Gary Kamiya, "Can American Jews Unplug AIPAC?" in SALON
http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fuj/salon13.htm
and Phil Giraldi, "Picking on Halliburton" ANTIWAR
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=10699

The necessary analysis is complex and requires historical context. Seems to me that what can be described as an "imperial faction" in the United States crystallized around the War with Spain and was rolling along by WWI. There are two components: a gentile "Wall Street" - "Eastern Establishment" component and a Jewish "High Finance" component. Both components team together for mutual benefit. Who is on top varies over time. Parallels the Brit situation over the past couple of centuries.

One major element of the Jewish component is the American Jewish Committee, established in 1906 as a foreign policy lobby. A well-informed friend of mine, whose father worked for the Americn Jewish Congress, recently pointed out to me that the American Jewish Committee was an emanation of the Kuhn Loeb banking house. Kuhn Loeb, of course, was a Rothschild proprietary under Jacob Schiff etal.

taters

Col. Lang,
Thoughtful, and certainly the current crop of presidential candidates seem to march to the beat of AIPAC regarding Iran.
Ali,
Well said. Perhaps it is some relief to me that both of my senators voted nay - Levin & Stabenow. Many of those 23 - including senators Kennedy and the late Paul Wellstone that voted nay stated that they were swayed by the testimony of Ret. Generals Clark and Zinni, and others in the house and senate respectively. (Chafee was the lone Republican senator who voted against.)
They ( Clark & Zinni )were also both tarred with accusations of being anti Semitic, among other accusations. The neocons seem to have no problem moving from within Likud and our current admin., and as Pat pointed out - access to both parties. It certainly seems to me that Richard Perle and others should be registered a dual agents.
If only Pat Lang was our Special Envoy to the ME...


taters

A randy little fellow, is he not? Funny.
I also really liked the AK video that you posted for us awhile back, Col.
Any thoughts on Jim Webb ( his aide ) and the 9 mm?
Perhaps if Sen Leahy was packing at the time VP Cheney would not have made his now infamous remark to him..

taters

I may have posted the 'randy dog' video comment on this thread. My apologies if so...

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28            
Blog powered by Typepad