Last week MJ Rosenberg reported in “New AIPAC Letter To Sink Iran Negotiations,” that a letter being circulated in the Senate to shut down Iran negotiations was drafted by the Israel lobby group. Well, today Mark Landler writes about that letter in the Times without informing his readers of this fact.
Landler’s article seeks to undermine Obama’s policy. His lead states, “the Obama administration is under mounting pressure to rethink a diplomatic exercise” on Iran. But where’s the pressure? The only experts Landler quotes to support his tendentious thesis are the AIPAC letter, which only got 44 signatures, and two pro-Israel zealots, Dennis Ross and Brad Sherman.
Ross is mentioned seven times. But Landler doesn’t tell the reader that Ross is co-chairman of the Israel-based thinktank, Jewish People Policy Institute. Landler:
“The issue here is, ‘How do you deal with a process that’s going to be harder and harder to justify?’ ” said Mr. Ross, who left the administration in December and is now a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “If it looks like you’re engaging in a process for the sake of process, that’s a bigger problem.”
Other critics are even blunter, labeling the talks a “charade” and demanding that Congress pass another round of sanctions against Iran. On Friday, 44 Republican and Democratic senators sent a letter to President Obama urging him to abandon the negotiations if the Moscow meeting failed to produce any concessions from Iran.
“Talks are going slowly but Iran’s centrifuges are moving quickly,” said Representative Brad Sherman, a California Democrat and member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who has taken a tough line against Tehran.
Mr. Sherman said the United States should impose sanctions against all of Iran’s banks that go beyond unilateral measures aimed at cutting off its Central Bank. Those measures, which will take effect at the end of the month, could still cause a change of heart on the part of the Iranians, administration officials say.
Claustrophobic journalism. I’d rather read Robert Wright or Larry Derfner. Wright says the Israel lobby is pushing Obama toward war. Derfner says that while he doesn’t buy the Walt and Mearsheimer theory that we wouldn’t have had an Iraq war without the Israel lobby, this war is different:
Iran is different. Israel and AIPAC have been leading the charge on this one for years, and they’re hardly hiding it - the Israeli campaign for America to get tough, tougher, toughest on Iran has been as bombastic as could possibly be. If America ends up bombing Iran first (unlikely), or being drawn into a war as a result of Israel’s bombing Iran first (much more likely), that American war will be stamped “Made In Israel” – not by Walt and Mearsheimer, but by everyone with eyes and ears in his or her head.
hey Iran,
All Your Yellowcake R Belong 2 Us
They would have us believe Iranian nukes are a threat, but look what I just learned reading Stephen Green’s Living by the Sword: America and Israel in the Middle East (the sequel to Taking Sides), page 117:
The book’s title is evidence that even back in 1980 Israel was already thinking of blowing up the whole world if they thought they were facing defeat.
Derfner wrote: that American war will be stamped “Made In Israel” – not by Walt and Mearsheimer, but by everyone with eyes and ears in his or her head.
Maybe for people with eyes and ears outside the US but certainly not anyone who relies on the NY Times for their information. I was just recently surprised to realize for how long the NY Times has been distorting the news about Israel and Zionism. They completely distorted Albert Einstein’s views of Zionism in their 1955 obituary.
“… but certainly not anyone who relies on the NY Times for their information.”
I agree, TavioS. Every quarter of the MSM has minimized or has never mentioned the connection between Israel Firsters and the looming war on Iran. If we do get dragged into this war we should expect the MSM to continue to mask the fact that this war has had Israel written all over it from the get go.
DEfner is wrong to suggest that Iraq war was not made in Israel. It was.It was a slow cooking going back to 1979 when Wolfie wanted to finsh Saddam ( there was mention of this converstaion in N Times ). Levy the Israeli FM in 1990 told the world if West did not attack Iraq, Israel would do so. It was the Israeli controlled -news media that kept the non existent threat to US from saddam alive and ignored the destruction wrought on Iraq by sanctions. It was the bill that was written by AIPAC to remove Saddam in Clinton’s time. We still remember how Bush 2 was asked what he would do with saddam . It was Israeli centric peopel who clamored for attack on Iraq immediately after 911. Per Colin Powell “it was JINSA crowd “that pushed the war. It was OSP that bypassed normal channel and establsiehed the conveyor belt of peddling lies from Israeli cabinet to US cabinet for war. When Israelis got giddy about it, Sharon told them to pipe down and hide .
The book “Transparent Cabal” estabished beyond doubt who orchestrated this war nclsuding lies about the threat to Bush1st life from saddam in Kuwait that was actually mounted by israeli agents. This was then used to explain Bush 2 interest in removing saddam like his father’s defeat was expalained by “economy stupid”
‘…the threat to Bush1st life from saddam in Kuwait that was actually mounted by israeli agents…’
Do tell. On the one hand, that does sound like exactly the sort of thing Israel finds irresistibly appealing. On the other hand, Saddam had lots of friends beside the Israelis, and I’m reluctant to fall into the trap of assuming that Israel does EVERYTHING vile that occurs in the world.
The conventional version is that the Kuwaitis cooked the books on the operation. That’s perfectly plausible as well.
more derfner:
i somehow missed that mjrosenberg article when it came out. he was completely right on with his take on the kind of non-offer available for iran. he said The offer is designed to be rejected. i agree, it was an offer of submission. theirs.
‘…The offer is designed to be rejected. i agree, it was an offer of submission. theirs…’
There’s a certain eerie similarity to Austro-Hungary’s ultimatum to Serbia there. Like Iran, the Serbia of the time was a mildly annoying state that actually wasn’t a genuine threat to anyone — there are even the uncertain and nebulous links to terrorist organizations.
Like ourselves, Austria had determined on crushing it. So her ultimatum was designed to be rejected. And in fact, although Serbia bent over backwards to comply with every demand she possibly could, Austria got her war. And the resulting World War One was unpleasant, prolonged, extremely expensive, and of no actual benefit to anyone, least of all Austria.
That will be our experience as well. I CANNOT BELIEVE how stupid, frivolous, and unnecessary all this is. It’s not even a question of ideology. We’re being led off a cliff by blithering idiots.
Come on, it is an ill wind that blows NO good at all, at all.
The MIC always profits when wars are fought no matter how stupid, unproductive, etc. Didn’t Halliburton, McDonnell-Douglas, Blackwater (to name a few) profit handsomely from the otherwise detestable Iraq and Afghan was (which pushed the USA fruther ito debt, since no taxes were collected to pay for them, because the VERY-RICH were also profiting from /or during/ these wars)? Joe Six-Pack may not have profited (except from misplaced pride in the USA’s miltary machine) but SOMEONE did profit.
And not just in Israel.
“The offer is designed to be rejected.” So, how strong is Iran’s military?
link to businessinsider.com
Biggest weapon? Blocking the Straits. Imagine Dick and Jane, jaws agape, as the
gas pump price rolls up by the hour as they tool around in their beater, looking for a job that pays a tad more than Burger King.
It’ll just make Dick and Jane want to bomb Iran some more.
Unfortunately, that will neither get them a job, lower the price of gas, nor arrest the suddenly renewed collapse of the global economy.
There is also the incidental consideration that bombing Iran will be egregiously immoral and completely counterproductive. I won’t go into the details of just WHY it can’t possibly do any good — but how can we be so willfully stupid?
““If it looks like you’re engaging in a process for the sake of process, that’s a bigger problem.”
-Dennis Ross
LOL. Ross had no problem with “engaging in a process for the sake of process” in the Oslo years. Wasn’t that your goal, Dennis? An now, suddenly, it’s time to dispense with process so that we can get Israel’s war on.
Incidentally, on the Iran front…
“Co-chair of Bipartisan Policy Center to Congress: Israel needs bombs, refueling tankers for strike on Iran
Former Senator calls on Congress to provide Israel with 200 bunker busters and aerial refueling military aircrafts [sic]…”
– Haaretz
So’s we can be clearly implicated when Israel bombs Iran! Watch us do it, too. It’d be exactly the kind of gutless compromise Obama goes for.
This is like giving a raving lunatic a loaded assault rifle. If Israel actually needs these things, then obviously the only responsible thing to do is to keep them from her.