Going into the basement conference room of a law firm on 6th Avenue in New York yesterday to hear former Cheney adviser David Wurmser speak on "What’s at Stake for the West in Lebanon?" I was afraid that the subject, Lebanon, and six years in the White House meant that I would see a domesticated Wurmser, there would be no sign of the firebreather who once pushed for the Iraq war by saying that "craven, fawning" western politicians had "appeased" Arabs who had modeled themselves on Nazis.
Not to worry. Speaking to an audience of about 70 gathered by the Middle East Forum, Wurmser said we are on our way to a catastrophic war with Iran whether we like it or not. He poured the straight old 150 proof moonshine from the old neocon jug. His extremism was untempered by the experience of the last six years.
What are the 3 things he would tell John McCain if he were his adviser?
"Let me just bluntly answer that. One, abandon the two-state solution statement that we have right now vis a vis the Palestinians. Two–Well, let me start with number one. Number one is an open, publicly expressed regime-change strategy in Iran. Two, an open expressed regime-change strategy in Syria. 3, abandoning the two-state solution policy we’ve had frankly since the 9/11 attacks…"
(Yes, Israel is always first for the neocons, then they hide the salami.)
And barely a word about what has happened in Iraq. I believe Wurmser mentioned Iraq only once substantively (must check the tape)–as a triumph that we had failed to solidify when we had cravenly asked the U.N. for permission to occupy post-invasion, thereby signaling our weakness to the Muslim world. And indeed Wurmer’s argument for a military confrontation with Iran, sooner not later, sounded a lot like the argument for a military confrontation with Iraq. The people want democracy. They look to the mighty west to provide it. We can’t disappoint them. I suppose they will welcome us with flowers.
The good news about the event is that the room in the basement of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel was only half-filled with mostly older people (and mostly Jews, my Jewdar told me, and even Wurmser seemed to acknowledge, when he said that everyone there follows the news from Israel/Palestine closely), and the roundish balding bespectacled true believer at the podium seemed purely historical. He conceded that George W. Bush has no appetite for a military confrontation with Iran (I wonder why!).
But let me report straightforwardly what Wurmser had to say.
All the reports from Europe and the State Department (which he derided as "Foggy Bottom") that Iran is becoming more moderate are false. Yes Iran is changing, but it is actually moving from "a pure theocracy to what is now essentially a theofascist state" that seeks confrontations with the west, and "a stream of victories," from Lebanon to Gaza, culminating in "destruction." "We’re headed for a major conflict with Iran, it won’t end nicely." The sooner we bring it on, the less horrific it will be.
Wurmser explained Iranian President Ahmadinejad by likening him to the Prophet Muhammed, the Soviets, and Hitler. He quoted a book by Saeed Jalili, "the mind behind Ahmadinejad", saying that when Muhammad arose as a tribal leader he fired all the negotiators and sent letters to Byzantium and Persia, telling them in essence to convert or "you will face the sword…." a bold act by a newcomer facing down "the two superpowers of his day." And look: when Ahmadinejad took power, he fired 100 ambassadors then sent a letter to George Bush! He was consulting Jalili’s holy-war Islamic playbook to reenact Muhammed’s challenge.
As I remember, Ahmadinejad’s letter was actually cordial and conciliatory–no matter. These things are "coded," Wurmser said. Ahmadinejad is all about jihad. He believes that the west has no will and if the west is challenged, it will fall like a "collapsing hollow tree." He has ordered Syria and Hezbollah to take on this holy war, and Hamas to conduct an "active hot war" with Israel, thus producing war after war till the west falls.
As for the Nazis, Wurmser said the "internal dynamic within the Iranian regime" was a lot like Hitler’s triumph of the will over his own hierarchy. "This is a lot like Hitler’s generals in the 1930s, who at every successive crises he would then turn to his generals and say you’re degenerate, you have no will." Wurmser said that Ahmadinejad thinks, "The west has no will. You have no will. I know I can get away with this and with each crisis he could increase his power by doing so." And so Iran will continue to amass power till the west faces a "catastrophic" situation. The Iranian people had looked to the west to bring the dictatorship to heel, but the west had failed them on numerous occasions, for instance when Europe began negotiations with Ahmadinejad over nuclear power.
Where is the evidence for Wurmser’s assertions about the Iranian will? As many neocons do, from Paul Berman to Daniel Pipes, he spoke with a scholarly authority, fluently throwing around the names of Muslim intellectuals and books. (Indeed, these neocon intellectuals study the Islamists with the same passion that I study them!) Wurmser’s fluency is not surprising; you’d expect it from a guy who spent years coordinating policy in the White House. But his theory struck me as largely that, a theory. His claim that Ahmadinejad is replaying the apocalyptic narrative of Muhammad or Hitler or the Soviet Union is based on his own view that the Muslim world is rife with evil men, and that we are good. You either subscribe to his judgment or not. Wurmser can read the code. We can’t.
And this is what I found so mindblowing. That a man who has such feverish and melodramatic ideas of a showdown between the east and the west, and who is so separated from reality that he regards Iraq as a triumph and Israel’s policy toward the Palestinians as one of forbearance, had so much power for so long. Scary.
Israeli forbearance? Wurmser is married to an Israeli and was funded at American Enterprise Institute in the good old days by Irving Moskowitz, a man who also funds colonial settlements in occupied territories, and Wurmser’s comments about Israel utterly merged the interests of the United States and Israel, as democracies trying to turn back the Islamofascists but lacking the will to do so. The will again. "Israel doesn’t seem to have the will to go back in [to Gaza]," he said with disappointment. "I don’t see any will." The idea that the Israeli treatment of Palestinians is a "red flag" of injustice across the Arab world (as Muhammed ElBaradei said on Charlie Rose) was pure calculation in Wurmser’s view; the Iranians have merely grabbed on to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as "the key emotive issue" to gain power from the Sunnis and the Arab world. Hamas is simply a tool of the Iranians thru Syria. Its electoral victory shows that the Palestinians have chosen "terrorism and a war against the west." There must be "consequences" for such behavior.
It should be pointed out that Wurmser’s evil empire has morphed. In his book Tyranny’s Ally, in 1999, our enemy was the Nazilike evil of pan-Arab nationalism. That was Israel’s opponent then. Well now the Persians don’t like Israel, so it’s Nazilike "theofascism" that we have to go to war with.
I wonder who is going to be fighting all Wurmser’s wars. I wanted to ask him why we should believe his statements about the Iranian people after his predictions about the Iraqi people turned out so badly…
But I thought I’d ask a non-adversarial question during the Q-and-A. "What is your vision for Israel if there’s no Palestinian state? What will you do with the millions of Palestinians?" I wasn’t called on (and maybe the doctrinal answer is contained in another stale neocon screed, the "Clean Break" paper he and the Perle-Feith braintrust created for Netanyahu 12 years ago). Yet I can imagine Wurmser’s answer; it would involve the word "will"–whether we and the Israelis have it or not. What a tragedy for the U.S. that this man had so much power. And for my people that prominent Jewish intellectuals are taking their lessons from Nazis.
Related Posts
- Neocons pushing regime change at point of a gun, again
- Emanuel Sounded Neocon Themes of Regime Change and Israel-Is-Perfect in ‘06
- Leftwing Jews Provide Cover to Extremist Wurmser
- Bookstore Owner Reinvites One-State Solution Author, But Doesn’t Explain Her Change of Heart, Nor Apologize
- Washington Post reporter Tom Ricks describes paper’s unreconstructed neocon op-ed page as ‘insane’






{ 23 comments }
Thank you for bringing up The Clean Break
paper, the importance of which in the chain
of events resulting in the complete Zionist
stranglehold on our current policy in the
Middle East can hardly be overestimated. One
can only hope this issue (along with the OSP,
which provided exaggerated Israeli
intelligence about Iraq) will be definitively
addressed in Stephen Sniegoski's forthcoming
book The Transparent Cabal.
Wurmser is indeed frightening because even though most American Jews claim to favor peace over war, the doves over the hawks, this is highly debatable. Many are closet Likud. Ever since Obama's anti-Likud statement, there has been a growing media shift away from him, and as you yourself have described, there is a prominent Jewish presence in the media. Although the war(-mongering) issue should predominate, the media, which got us into this war, has sucessfully shifted the public's focus to the economy. (Incidentally tonight on PBS in teh Boston area anyway, Bill Moyers "Buying the War" classic will be re-shown. It well documents the media's treacherous role.) Even though Obama is bending over backwards to show support for Israel, it will never be enough for the Likudniks. Hillary is taking full advantage of this (with the help of Barney's lovely sister) to capture the Jewish vote as she is much more the war-monger. She even supports cluster bombs and an undivided Jerusalem which will prevent the birth of any Palestinian state. Of course the Jewish media pundits will now claim they support Hillary because of her health plan, etc. Fat chance of any health plan as our debt to China skyrockets into perpetuity.
.
"I thought I'd ask a non-adversarial question during the Q-and-A. 'What is your vision for Israel if there's no Palestinian state? What will you do with the millions of Palestinians?'" – Phil W.
You read my mind, Phil. A unified state is the likely future. One hopes that it will be a pluralistic state. But Israeli chauvinists such as Wurmser probably have in mind some apocalyptic Final Solution for the Arabs, involving a thorough ethnic cleansing. Merely penning them into ghettos, Warsaw-style, isn't enough for the Wurmsers of this world.
All of this prattle about "will" seems to have Nietzschean and Wagnerian overtones. Should anyone be surprised that Wurmser fantasizes IDF phalanxes triumphantly lopping off Palestianian heads to the strains of "Ride of the Valkyries"? Israel shall rule for a thousand years!
"Going into the basement conference room of a law firm on 6th Avenue in New York yesterday to hear former Cheney adviser David Wurmser speak …"
Man, that sounds sordid, Phil. If you'd walked in the wrong door in that dark corridor, you might have found yourself getting an 'erotic massage.'
Great post.
Who will fight the coming wars with Iran and who knows else? Why, David Wurmser, that's who!
I fully expect him to present himself at the Marine recruiting station, ready to hit the sand with all the vigor the flabby neocon can muster. And if he can't, then surely he'll volunteer his kids for the effort. Wurmser's a good American, I know he would. And if his kids aren't of age, then I know Wurmser will encourage his siblings to volunteer their kids. After all, this is a war for the preservation of Western civilization. To not fight would be unthinkable, eh David?
Nader's got a good idea on this score. Get congress to pass a measure REQUIRING the children of U.S. reps, senators and White House officials to sign up for the killing machine during wartime.
"Ahmadinejad is all about jihad. He believes that the west has no will"
"We have to be willing, morally willing", Yaron Brooks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaron_Brook#Philosophical_and_Political_Views
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_%28philosophy%29
From RightWeb:
"While at IASPS, Wurmser participated in a 1996 study group that produced a report for the incoming Likud-led government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel that urged the country to break off then-ongoing peace initiatives and suggested strategies for reshaping the Middle East. Among its proposals, it argued that "removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq [was] an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right." The report—titled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" and coauthored by Feith, Perle, and Meyrav Wurmser…"
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1392.html
The only conclusion that can be drawn from Jews like Feith, Perle and the Wurmsers, who jet back and fourth between Israel and America strategizing with the Israeli government ways to get American soldiers killed fighting wars for Judeofascism, is that both they and the gentile "American" authorities who put up with it have been so corrupt, venal, and morally unhinged for so long that some organic change has taken place in their brains, rendering them inhuman. No human being could possibly have barbecues with his American neighbors on the weekends, and then plot to lie those neighbors' sons and daughters into war for a foreign country on Mondays, and maintain their humanity.
The I'm-a-victim,-everything-I-do-is-justified mentality in conjunction with the I-am-chosen,-everything-I-do-is-ordained mentality has apparently created a whole new species, identifiably by its sociopathic narcissism. And all of that species, both Jew and gentile, seems attracted to ideological Zionism like moths to light.
"sociopathic narcissism"
Posted by: Ed. | March 07, 2008 at 10:04 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That defines it up perfectly.
Stephen Sniegoski knew what was going on before we even invaded Iraq. Today, most Amercans are still clueless. They don't like the war mostly because it hasn't gone well, not because it was total BS from the start. The Likud plan was put into motion by the ignorant bible thumper Bush, looking for a reason why he
was suddenly the President, and not just another DUI loser. The Neocons were glad to give him a reason. Once at the white house, he's been cunning enough to know where his bread n butter lies. If the Germans were dupes, what are Americans?
In the end, the neocons will bring it down to a Military draft. LOL! Nader has resurected a proposal to require any Congress
which keeps the wars going to put their sons and daughters in the frontline first. LOL!
Not a fan of Mr Wurmser, per se, but this critique leaves much to be desired Mr. Weiss. The fawning of your own fascistic peanut gallery not withstanding.
"Hide the salami" doesn't seem to mean what it used to mean.
Israeli Yediot newspaper: I know this will annoy many of your readers… But the anger is over the fact that Israel did not fight against the Syrians [during last summer’s war in Lebanon]. Instead of Israel fighting against Hizbullah, many parts of the American administration believe that Israel should have fought against the real enemy, which is Syria and not Hizbullah. They hoped Israel would do it [attack Syria]. You cannot come to another country and order it to launch a war, but there was hope, and more than hope, that Israel would do the right thing. It would have served both the American and Israeli interests. The neocons are responsible for the fact that Israel got a lot of time and space… They believed that Israel should be allowed to win. A great part of it was the thought that Israel should fight against the real enemy, the one backing Hizbullah. It was obvious that it is impossible to fight directly against Iran, but the thought was that its strategic and important ally should be hit.”
The speaker is Meyrav Wurmser, David’s wife. And she’s describing his viewpoint. Remember this is the man who, according to Kevin Drum, “keeps Dick Cheney bucked up in crisis time.” And for the Neocon coven, every time is crisis time, or should be.
Meanwhile back at the New York Times, the paper of record tells us “that Mr. Cheney believes the diplomatic track with Iran is pointless, and is looking for ways to persuade Mr. Bush to confront Iran militarily.” I am sure that Mr. Cheney and his Mini-Me, David Wurmser, know that the “diplomatic track” is useful every now and again, but I’m having trouble thinking of when. In fact, I think we could convert this sentence by Helen Cooper into a motto for the team: “Mr. Cheney believes that the diplomatic track with x is pointless, and is looking for ways to persuade Mr. Bush to confront x militarily.” Now solve for x: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, North Korea, Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba… China? Which leaves me being thankful. By this point we should all be dead in some thermonuclear conflagration. But we’re still alive. However, I have my doubts as to our surviving the next eighteen months.
Candid Zionist statement of their goals and attitudes that you will nver see in the US mass media.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/palestinians.html
"Yes, Israel is always first for the neocons, then they hide the salami."
Will Phil please get a fucking clue and stop using this term? It means sex Phil, you remember? I know your wife doesn't put out, but shit, you married a WASP, so live with it!!
"Yes, Israel is always first for the neocons, then they hide the salami."
Will Phil please get a fucking clue and stop using this term? It means sex Phil, you remember? I know your wife doesn't put out, but shit, you married a WASP, so live with it!!
It must be torture for sim, he hates Phil's words with such a fury, yet he pores over each and every one!
"Hide the salami" is a terrific term for what neocon ideological cowards do when they speak to the American people. Might I humbly suggest to Phil, version 2.0, maybe a touch better, could be, "Hide the pastrami"?
I'm guessing MM has never seen a pastrami, otherwise he's not be able to suggest that change with such unselfconsciousness!
But indeed MM is on to something, I obsess over Phil the way Wurmser does the Islamists and the way Phil does the Wurmsers. We're watching each other, knowing, deep-down that we are "hypocrites lecteurs, mes semblables, mes freres." At least I know that and Wurmser knows it, Phil . . .probably not.
Wurmser is a lunatic.
Sim: "Phil. . . , I know your wife doesn't put out, but shit, you married a WASP, so live with it!!"
Sim, you really ought to learn to hide your anti-gentile bigotry better.
Can read more about Wurmser's association with the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda via the 'A Clean Break' link at the top of http://NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT.BLOGSPOT.COM
Speaking of pastrami, Winston Churchill, grandson of the famous one, spoke before the National Press Club on 10/11/01, and recalled Sharon being asked after the 1967 war what was to become of the Palestinians. Churcill said Sharon's "chilling" reply was "We'll make a pastrami sandwich of them," meaning that the occupied territories would become a pastrami sandwich with layers of Jewish settlements preventing a viable Palestinian state.
That hot, juicy pastrami sandwich has had some nice subtle commercials for the fat American (m)asses.
I think I should drag this up again–thanks to Todd:
"There are many differences between U.S./colonial history and that of Israel. Whatever the similarities are, we don't ask the world to support, finance or ignore our Indian policies.
At the moment, the U.S. has much more in common with Israel than at the founding, and we are now asking the world to support, ignore, and help finance our crimes.
Whatever the historical accuracies of the past are, the present reality is that the U.S. is morally on the hook for Palestine when it shouldn't be. How should a person with loyalty to the U.S. feel about that fact?" (Posted by: Todd | March 01, 2008)
Mr. Wurmser,
Two words: Follow me. Otherwise STFU.
We're on to you.
Comments on this entry are closed.