Harvard Crimson piece on Marty Peretz's "dual legacy" includes the fact that he was thesis adviser to Stuart A. Levey. Levey was formerly the deputy under secretary of Treasury who lingered from Bush administration to Obama administration because he had the Iran portfolio, only to be replaced by his former law partner, David Cohen.
You connect the dots, I'm tired. But:
Peretz is an ultra-Zionist. And he dandled Levey in his lap. And Levey has a political appointment in the Bush administration that continues unbroken into the Obama administration, because he represents a constituency: the Israel lobby. I've been reading Lincoln on the Dred Scott decision, undertaken in concert by the Supreme Court with the presidential election of '56 and Congressional actions of '56, in a rancid conspiracy. Conspiracy was Lincoln's word. The Israel lobby is all over our politics like white on rice. Will someone dig up this cat's thesis?
Levey, who wrote his thesis on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, remembers Peretz as a “warm” adviser who encouraged his personal interest in the region.
Phil, some people know the “truth”. and are persuaded by it. Are we not? Well, so is Peretz, Levey, and others. Their truth is, presumably based on Jewish need and entitlement (Holocaust created both). The human rights of Palestinians are trivial in this calculus, and trivial terms are always omitted from grant calculations.
That said, the conspiracy WITHIN our government, the existence of “seats” owned by AIPAC, is a scandal, tho well-known or well-guessed. But, c’mon. where the WHOLE CONGRESS is owned by AIPAC, why cavil at one administration post or two? (Levey, various ambassadors to israel, Dennis Ross).
Was glad that Dennis Ross came up during the Mearsheimer/Walt speak at the Move over Aipac conference. When Ross was appointed most of us knew the Obama administration had sold out real negotiations taking place on the I/P issue at the start.
I’ll tell you why, in my opinion:
Because under the Bush (and now Obama) Administration’s conception of the “unitary executive,” the president’s office has become increasingly powerful and without adequate oversight or check. Add to that the fact that our “free press” rarely cover what is going on behind the scenes in these executive subdivisions, so to speak.
Cheney loved this aspect of the Nixon administration and I would argue that the drive toward the “strong unitary executive” (re)started with the Bush/Cheney “secret” energy cabal and with Bush quickly ensuring, by executive order, that his father’s (and Clinton’s) presidential papers will remain classified rather than archived for the public and for historians. This continued after 9/11 and the Patriot Act (and the so-called torture memos).
Good points. Thanks.
“And Levey has a political appointment in the Bush administration that continues unbroken into the Obama administration, because he represents a constituency: the Israel lobby”
As intelligent as Obama seems it is amazing that he left Levey in that position. Brought Dennis Ross in. Does he ultimately want the status quo?
Will be in Colorado for a month this summer. Was checking out what is happening at the Aspen Institute (used to attend when I lived in Aspen) Noticed Levey and many of the Iraq/Iran warmongers are leading speakers at the event. Aspen Institute sure took a hard turn to the radical right a couple of decades ago.
link to aspensecurityforum.org
Certainly, America’s killing of Osama bin Laden is a huge victory in the war against Al Qaeda. That he was brought to justice before the iconic tenth anniversary of 9/11, and amid an “Arab Spring” that is revolutionizing the Mideast through peaceful, secular, and democratic means, make the moment all the sweeter.
But, in the words of no less an authority than CIA Director Leon Panetta, “bin Laden is dead, but Al Qaeda is not.” Al Qaeda, the organization and its affiliates around the world, remains, and, more importantly, bin Ladenism, the idea that he sparked, is very much alive. If anything, the threat of attacks on our homeland is likely to rise, at least in the short-term, as bin Laden’s followers feel obliged to avenge his killing and to prove their continued potency and relevance.
In the wake of bin Laden’s death, policymakers and average citizens alike are rightly asking fundamental questions like:
link to aspensecurityforum.org
Hadley, Chertoff, Yoo. Levey is on the list
Look at this speaker list. Talk about recycling warmongers. In some countries they hold their war criminals (those who helped create, disseminate false intelligence) accountable. In the US they just go on the talk show and speaker circuit.
Sure do not see any of the deal with the real US National security issues analyst like Michael Scheuer, Flynt Leverett, General Jones, General Wesley Clark. 1. The Israeli Palestinian Conflict
2. US support for dictators in the region
3. US military bases in the region
Kathleen,
I go (and will go) to Colorado in the summer, to Aspen for a day or so for concerts, otherwise to Evergreen as a base for hiking; and I am shocked, shocked, to learn that Colorado (and not Colo Spgs, either) is a hot-bed of right-wing Zionist activity.
This has not always been the case
Lived out there for about 15 years. Still have some land out there. My kids grew up every summer hiking, river rafting, basically living outdoors on family land and the national forest up around Lake George. About an hour into the mountains on 24 out of Manitou Springs. Strong growing Buddhist community in Colo Spgs, and Manitou
Bin Laden was less dangerous alive than he is dead.
Che Gueverra became a symbol for terrorists for decades, a gathering point for many fractions in Germany, Italy, etc.
General Wesley Clark, he was a lausy tennis player and liked to show off his .38 Colts. We should never let retired generals get into politics, probably Eisenhower was the last one we could trust. Ask Colin Powell how many innocent civilians did he kill in Vietnam, before his lying at the UN.
” We should never let retired generals get into politics, probably Eisenhower was the last one we could trust.”
Eisenhower wasn’t actually much of a general. He was always more of a politician. He was just the right man to keep the British, Canadians, Americans, and Free French sufficently mollified to more or less work together.
But he didn’t really understand much about strategy and tactics.
Montgomery did. Montgomery could fight and win battles, and got really frustrated with Eisenhower’s ideas at times. But he was no politician. His armies loved him (generals who win battles are usually popular with their troops) but everyone else thought he was an arsehole.
Yes Montgomery was a pretty strange person. Great tactician but in terms of politics and humanity he left a lot to be desired – in particular he seems to have been a supporter of the apartheid regime in SA. I recall seeing him on TV in the UK – he would never have made a good politician – too willing to voice his true opinions of his colleagues and of other matters.
It is a real bummer that Obama kept Levey on. He was extremely aggressive in going after sanctions on Iran. It is like the whole office he was in charge with went 100% after Iran despite its worldwide mandate. And, as noted above, to appoint Ross in charge of the Iran portfolio is just a complete nod to AIPAC/Likudniks especially considering his non-expertise in Iran. And finally, Hillary Clinton is the Secretary of State and her view on Iran was much more hawkish.
One thing that struck me about the Obama campaign was when he was asked about meeting with enemy foreign leaders, he said (and I looked it up): “I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous.” And in other ways, he seemed like he would have a distinctly less imperial policy than Hillary. But alas, she’s the damn Secretary of State.
He said a few words Hillary would not, and he challenged Netanyahu 3 times and failed miserably so give him some credit there, except for failing. I normally like when the tail wags the dog but not here, it’s too humiliating. But the appointments of Ross and Levey and now presumably David Cohen are really disappointing. And only explicable by looking to the Lobby.