In bid for Adelson’s millions, Rubio announces braintrust of pro-Israel old-timers

Marco Rubio is now desperate to keep his campaign alive as the credible Republican establishment alternative to frontrunner Donald Trump and the surging Ted Cruz; and yesterday he threw a Hail Mary in a bid for Sheldon Adelson’s funding: he announced a “national security advisory council” that includes many prominent supporters of Israel. The list of neoconservative old-timers is an implicit announcement that Rubio will do everything he can for the rightwing government of Israel.

Sheldon Adelson kept Republican campaigns afloat in 2012. He has not said who he’s supporting this time around. But his number one issue is Israel.

The cravenness of the Rubio list is epitomized by the presence of Dan Senor, the former spokesperson for the US occupying government of Iraq and co-author of Startup Nation, an effort to sell Israel to the U.S. as a technological powerhouse; Norm Coleman, the former Minnesota senator who has Sheldon Adelson links; Eliot Cohen, who urged George Bush to remove Saddam Hussein because “Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight;” and Elliott Abrams, the neoconservative eminence grise who said that Jews must stand apart from the society they live in except in Israel.

Another adviser, Aaron Friedberg, was a China hawk in the Bush administration and days after 9/11 called for removing Saddam even if there was no evidence that he had anything to do with the attack on the U.S. Eliot Cohen signed that letter too; it said 9/11 was all about Israel’s enemies:

“Even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, … [we must] remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq…

“…any war against terrorism must target Hezbollah…

“Israel has been and remains America’s staunchest ally against international terrorism, especially in the Middle East. The United States should fully support our fellow democracy in its fight against terrorism. We should insist that the Palestinian Authority put a stop to terrorism emanating from territories under its control… Until the Palestinian Authority moves against terror, the United States should provide it no further assistance.”

Coleman is a proud supporter of AIPAC and once supported the idea of the U.S. attacking Iran. His Adelson link:

A board member of the Republican Jewish Coalition, a rightwing “pro-Israel” group whose donors include Sheldon Adelson, Coleman has echoed common Republican criticisms of President Obama’s statements on Israel. “Israel’s position has been undermined,” he told the Weekly Standard in September 2011.

The list includes Dov Zakheim, a former Pentagon official described as a strong supporter of Israel; former Bush Homeland Security boss Michael Chertoff; and former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who lately advised Jeb Bush in his failed presidential bid. Mukasey says in a statement:

[Rubio] is the only candidate with the knowledge and judgment needed to confront radical Islamic terrorism.

Abrams said yesterday he is “delighted” to join Rubio’s team and portrays Rubio as a great student:
He has an innate understanding of America’s important role in supporting freedom and standing up to tyranny. As President he would ensure that our allies respect us again and our enemies fear us.
“Outside the land of Israel, there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart–except in Israel–from the rest of the population.”

Mother Jones says the team is the neoconservative dreamteam and points out that it includes many George W. Bush alumni.

Abrams and Cohen were members of the Project for a New American Century, an early-2000s group of neconservatives who pushed for big increases in defense spending, more American military intervention abroad, regime change in Iraq, and other policies that became Bush administration staples. Rubio’s foreign policy vision is basically ripped from the group’s platform: He wants to pour money into expanding the military, ramp up missile defense, get aggressive with both Iran and China, and expand the US role in Syria.

Commenters at MJ are on to the Zionism of the list.

Another adviser, Eric Edelman, who served on Dick Cheney’s staff, says Rubio, who has been in the Senate for five years, will have no learning curve on foreign policy!

As one of the most active members of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Rubio will not have a learning curve when he steps into the Oval Office.

Bear in mind that Rubio’s claim on the establishment means less and less, as the Republican Party slowly inches away from Israel support as a core value. As Chemi Shalev wrote in a widely-circulated piece at Haaretz, Trump “is decimating the three legs of blanket Republican support for Israel: Evangelicals, Jews and interventionist hawks.”

The press has pointed out that a Koch Brothers guru in Washington has joined the Rubio staff lately. Let’s see if any of them talk about the Israel lobby in connection with Rubio’s foreign policy advisers.

Here’s the list, from Rubio’s site:

U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman
Ambassador Paula Dobriansky, former Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs
Ambassador Eric Edelman, former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
Aaron Friedberg, former Deputy National Security Advisor to the Vice President
Kim Holmes, former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs
Ambassador Robert Joseph, former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl
John Lehman, former Secretary of the Navy
Michael Mukasey, former Attorney General
Andrew Natsios, former Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development
Dan Senor, former Senior Adviser and Chief Spokesman, Coalition in Iraq
Ambassador Kristen Silverberg, former Ambassador to the European Union
U.S. Sen. Jim Talent
Dov Zakheim, former Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)

23 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“is decimating the three legs of blanket Republican support for Israel: Evangelicals, Jews and interventionist hawks.”

This isn’t accurate. The exit polls in SC showed that Trump was beating Cruz with the evangelicals. In most other Southern states they have been fairly close.

What is really happening is Chemi Shalev freaking out over the Israel lobby’s strangehold over the GOP. It’s the same fear that Bill Kristol has. It exposes his tribalism. He just throws in the Christian element to hide it, in the same way people talk about irrelevant groups like CUFI in order not to talk about Jewish groups like AIPAC(the ones that really matter).

Neocons are just Jewish nationalists, with a few WASPs sprinkled between. Those WASPs are either craven opportunists or Islamophobes who view Zionism as a conduit to advance their bigotry(think Niall Ferguson or similar odious types).

The truth is, the GOP base may not like the Palestinians but if there was ever an open debate in the GOP media about the causes of interventionism(the neocon/Zionist takeover of the conservative media), they would quickly abandon the Israel right or wrong cause.

This is why Buchanan was purged, because the neocons/Zionists know this. It’s why you can smell the fear even at a distance from people like Kristol or his “liberal” helpers like Chalev. I saw the other day that the former ADL bigot, Foxman, was comparing Trump to Hitler. This is a man who has been uncompromising about his support for an Apartheid state(and paid no social price for it, ever).

What we will likely now move to a contested convention. This is Rubio’s long-term play. Trump probably knows what is going on but he’s savaged at every turn now. Not just in ads from the GOP establishment but I’ve noticed the general media taking a much harder line now. This limits his responses.

Trump’s at his strongest when talking about foreign policy. It’s why he crushed Jeb! in SC. But after all these “Trump = Hitler” attacks in the media lately, he can’t talk about the Israel lobby and the Rubio campaign, because the Foxman-type Jewish supremacists would seize the moment, aided by neocons and “liberals” like Chalev, Chait and the rest of the gang.

For Rubio, the hope is that these influencers will grant Rubio the nod at the convention.

A part of me kind of hopes that Rubio would get it during back-room deals at the convention. The nonsense that a young brown puppet of the Israel lobby would somehow be what America wants would be annihilated.

Bernie’s team are, in the meantime, playing the long game:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-donors-220384

This is what awaits these vile neocons in the democratic party. They can vote for Hillary but they know it is a one-way ticket. The base will destroy them if they even try to influence foreign policy. The rising star of the DNC is Tulsi Gabbard, loved by the base and DWS is the hated wench who is only loved by Zionist donors. Tulsi will be back when her time has come, when the Bernie generation, the post-9/11 and the post-Iraq generation fully come of age. We saw glimmers of it in 2004. In 2016 it has matured far more. With time, it will capture the whole party. Clinton’s already been pushed far to the left, getting very critical comments on her interventionism.

The neocons are totally finished if they think this is the party that they can join over the long haul.

This is the future now.

Elliott Abrams quote: “Outside the land of Israel, there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart–except in Israel–from the rest of the population.”

Is there anyone who truly believes that Elliott Abrams and others who share this belief of his are truly assimilated into American life? That Elliott Abrams represents the strong Jewish identity associated with multiculturalism in a pluralistic society? Are you assimilated if you can move freely throughout society, yet identify as a member of an exclusivist group, a people apart? Is one-sided sectarianism compatible with multiculturalism?

Rubio appears to be a sinking ship. He is behind Kasich on the betting market. Trump has about a 70% chance of the nomination and Cruz 20%. The two most odious choices to the Establishment are left standing. It would be pretty hilarious if it wasn’t for real. Actually, it is still hilarious.

RE: Abrams said yesterday he is ‘delighted’ to join Rubio’s team and portrays Rubio as a great student: “He has an innate understanding of America’s important role in supporting freedom and standing up to tyranny. As President he would ensure that our allies respect us again and our enemies fear us.”

AS TO ANY “INNATE UNDERSTANDING OF AMERICA’S IMPORTANT ROLE IN STANDING UP TO TYRANNY” AND/OR “ENSURING THAT OUR ALLIES RESPECT US AGAIN AND OUR ENEMIES FEAR US”, LET’S RECALL WHAT THE GIPPER TAUGHT US NOT LONG AGO:
“When Reagan Cut and Run” | By Micah Zenko | FforeignPolicy.com | February 7, 2014
The forgotten history of when America boldly abandoned ship in the Middle East.

[EXCERPTS] Thirty years ago this week, President Ronald Reagan made perhaps the most purposeful and consequential foreign-policy decision of his presidency. Though he never said so explicitly, he ended America’s military commitment to a strategic mistake that was peripheral to America’s interests. Three-and-a-half months after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. military personnel — and after repeatedly pledging not to do so — Reagan ordered the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Lebanon. . .

. . . Upon the request of the government of Lebanon, the United Nations authorized the Multinational Force in Lebanon (MNF) in 1982 to help the government regain control over the country. . .

. . . In October 1983, after five Marines were killed in three separate incidents, National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane convinced the president to authorize the USS New Jersey to launch attacks against the Druze militia and Syrian forces on land. According to Powell, once the naval attack commenced, the Shiites “assumed the American ‘referee’ had taken sides against them. And since they could not reach the battleship, they found a more vulnerable target: the exposed Marines at the airport.” Within one week, Hezbollah-linked militants drove two truck bombs containing a half a kiloton of explosives into the Marine barracks at the Beirut International Airport, killing 220 Marines and 21 other U.S. service members.

In the months that followed, the Reagan administration discussed a range of options including striking back and fully withdrawing the Marines. Reagan never retaliated against Hezbollah or their Iranian and Syrian sponsors responsible for the bombings, a position widely endorsed by senior military officials. As then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. John Vessey declared: “It is beneath our dignity to retaliate against the terrorists who blew up the Marine barracks.”

The Reagan administration also considered the pluses and minuses of withdrawing from the MNF. On the day after the barracks bombing, however, the president reaffirmed his commitment: “The reason they must stay there until the situation is under control is quite clear. We have vital interests in Lebanon. And our actions in Lebanon are in the cause of world peace.” Over a month later, on Dec. 1, Reagan stated that the Marines were in Beirut to “demonstrate the strength of our commitment to peace in the Middle East…. Their presence is making it possible for reason to triumph over the forces of violence, hatred, and intimidation.” Nine days later, he told the nation: “Once internal stability is established and withdrawal of all foreign forces is assured, the Marines will leave.” Finally, on Feb. 4, 1984, Reagan stated something frequently heard in debates over Afghanistan and other theaters of conflict today — if the United States withdraws, “we’ll be sending one signal to terrorists everywhere: They can gain by waging war against innocent people…. If we’re to be secure in our homes and in the world, we must stand together against those who threaten us.”

Yet, just three days later, on Feb. 7, Reagan ordered the Marines to “redeploy” to their ships offshore — which was actually a full withdrawal achieved in three weeks. Although the Marine’s mission in Lebanon was not clearly defined and, subsequently, not achieved, Reagan’s tacit admission of failure and withdrawal of the Marines from Lebanon limited America’s further involvement in foreign-policy disaster — saving money, lives, and time. . .

ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/02/07/when-reagan-cut-and-run/

P.S. LESSON TAUGHT BY THE GIPPER: Speak sternly, put on a real manly show and try not to get your dick caught in a sausage grinder.

“Outside the land of Israel, there can be no doubt that Jews, faithful to the covenant between God and Abraham, are to stand apart from the nation in which they live. It is the very nature of being Jewish to be apart–except in Israel–from the rest of the population.”

Wow he recommended an up front in your face fifth column in the US population – this from a man who later became a National Security Adviser under GWB Junior.

Ilustrates just how blind and f….d up America has become under the control of the Elders.