Soldier, the new bio of Colin Powell by Karen DeYoung of the Washington Post, includes some incisive comments about the neoconservatives’ concern for Israel’s interests. Per the LA Times review:
According to the author, the then-secretary went out of his way to identify the pro-war neoconservatives as affiliates of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, a think-tank with decidedly hard-line views on Israel’s security. “Powell referred to Rumsfeld’s team as the ‘JINSA crowd.’ ” Later in “Soldier,” readers are told that the neoconservatives in the Defense Department — nearly all of them Jews — supported war against Iraq as the first step to replacing Arab despots with democratic governments that would sever their ties to the Palestinians, thereby enhancing Israel’s security. In explaining why he did not resign over his profound differences with the White House, Powell cited the example of Gen. George C. Marshall, who refused to quit as secretary of State even though he opposed President Truman’s recognition of Israel as a quest for “Jewish votes.”
The LAT’s reviewer, Tim Rutten, dismisses this thinking as a “blot,” the old “dual-loyalty” charge. Yes, this is how we are chided again and again, that it’s wrong and antisemitic to even raise the question. Yet the evidence won’t go away: that the Iraq war plans were pushed by people who opposed the Oslo peace process and dismissed the Palestinians’ grievances as baseless, who saw the way to peace in Jerusalem going through Baghdad. These delusions need to be exposed, and as Tony Judt has said, just because bigots and antisemites have made similar types of charges about neoconservative influence should not stop serious people from reckoning with facts.
Actually this is what Rutten, a left-wing, liberal had to say:
"Whatever his bitterness over his mistreatment, Powell knows that these old and wholly unmeritorious allegations of dual loyalty are a slander. He knows better and so does DeYoung. Their presence in this book is another blot on his record."
You SUCK as a journalist. YOU DISTORT. You and slime-bag Judt should move to Europe together and hate Jews over there where you are in good company.
You are a JOKE and are turning the Observer into a JOKE.
Powell has joined a pretty long list of public officials who have spoken out about the role of the Israel-firsters in marketing the war. How long can it be kept from the public?
Remember when Congressman Moran first mentioned the obvious? Ari Fleischer professed to be "shocked." :)
Review of Michael T. Benson's book Harry S. Truman and the Founding of Israel:
Everyone knows that Harry Truman provided help to the Zionists because he could count votes, and there were few Arab votes in 1948. That, anyway, is the thesis developed by John Snetsinger in 1974 and since repeated ad nauseum. Well, it turns out not to be true. In a masterful and exciting presentation, Benson proves that Truman's policies resulted not from nose-counting but from deeply-held beliefs. His pro-Israel outlook "was based primarily on humanitarian, moral, and sentimental grounds, many of which were an outgrowth of the president's religious upbringing and his familiarity with the Bible." Extensive research into Truman's biography and earlier career shows his impressive consistency. Benson, of the University of Utah, establishes Truman as a studious child and deeply religious young man who, when he unexpectedly found himself in the Oval Office, lived faithfully by his precepts. In the case at hand, he expressed sympathy for Zionism as early as 1939 and reiterated his views many times subsequently.
The standard account of Truman risking U.S. security interests for cheap political advantage is deeply unfair to this most moral and honorable of American presidents.
Thanks, patty, for your heartfelt defense of a president you obviously care deeply for. What you forgot to tell us is that the review you quoted was written by Daniel Pipes–
http://www.amazon.com/Harry-S-Truman-Founding-Israel/dp/0275958078
Here's another quote about Mr. Benson's book, this one from the Journal of Palestine Studies–"What is most notable about this book is its total pro-Israel orientation."
Editorial in the International Herald Tribune 10/2/2006:
"The White House needs to lose its Mideast myths"
_____________________________
The editorial was ahead of Condoleezza Rice's visit to the Mideast. It urges her to pressure the Israelis "to immediately end targeted killings and halt all settlement construction" (which implies that they are going on). And the editorial says this:
"For years, Bush's advisers have woven an entire mythology obout how Middle East peace required tanks on the road to Baghdad …"
As Phil says in his above comment, the neocons – Bush's advisers – "saw the way to peace in Jerusalem going through Baghdad." The International Herald Tribune (which is owned by the New York Times) now says the same thing: the Jerusalem-centered idea was nonsense to begin with.
Klaus
Frankfurt, Germany
"This book is a slightly modified version of Benson's Oxford University Ph.D. dissertation. There he studied Modern Middle Eastern History.
As an academic work, the research is absolutely unmatched, with dozens of references and footnotes for each chapter. The author interviewed several prominent people who knew Truman and participated in the development of the policy toward Israel."
Do Powell's actions speak of a the power of a lobby or a LOSER Secretary of State who comes up with some bizarre, illogical rationale to defend why he went along with a war he opposed???
we have to make sure there is unity between palestine and the other muslims governments. we can't let the neo cons win.
nice blog get lots of information !!!
_____________________________________
Dissertation help
More & more people know that blog are good for every one where we get lots of information any topics !!!
______________________________
Penis Size