"And the beat goes on,
the beat goes on.
Drums keep pounding a rhythm to the brain"
~ Sonny and Cher
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” ~ George Orwell
In this case, as with all of the recent conflagrations in the Middle East, one must ask, just who deserves the title of "homicidal maniac? The instigator or the targeted ruler? The article printed after this one is from 2004 and shows Elliott has been pushing for Israel all along. Just check his record and the company he keeps.
Land Destroyer
By Tony Cartalucci
March 28, 2011
Degenerate globalist co-conspirator Elliott Abrams, has been consistently supporting the recent conflagration throughout the Arab world and is pushing for ever-expanding US meddling in the region. In his recent piece, featured in the Washington Post titled "Ridding Syria of a Despot," he fleshes out what is a fairly predictable plan of action already taking shape against the Bush-era "Axis of Evil" member.
Elliott Abrams is a member of the corporate-financier Council on Foreign Relations, a Project for a New American Century signatory, and former deputy national security adviser to President George W. Bush. He was convicted for his involvement in the Iran-Contra conspiracy and promptly pardoned by George Bush Sr.
He would later go on to be implicated for his involvement in the 2002 Venezuela coup attempt against Hugo Chavez. His history of betraying and disgracing his country, and getting away with it, is probably why he feels perfectly comfortable making broad, sweeping threats toward entire nations today.
Elliott Abrams recently issued a personal threat to Libya's Qadaffi and his intelligence chief, stating that they would both meet the "same fate as Saddam Hussein" if any American is attacked in the wake of increasing US threats and actions against Libya. He also had weighed in on Egypt in his piece "Less 'Engagement,' More Democracy" in the New York Times.
In this piece he criticizes the current policy of engaging as equals with nations he deems as repressive regimes and calls for a revisit to George Bush's "freedom agenda." In other words ~ the export of "democracy" that has brought America the trillion dollar military adventures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya at the cost of thousands of US soldiers' lives and the lives of millions of foreigners killed, maimed, or displaced.
Retired admiral and diplomat William Crowe
referred to Abrams as "a snake who is hard to kill.”
It should be no surprise then that Abrams, who has never shouldered a rifle for his nation himself, is more than eager to move on to Syria with a myriad of aggressive attacks on its sovereignty prepared and ready in hand.
Abrams calls on the White House and Congress to condemn Syria, in particular the Assad government. He suggests that Syria be immediately brought before the UN Security Council, who just recently finished extra-legally ordaining the war with Libya. The Human Rights Council and the International Criminal Court are also mentioned as possible avenues to pressure Assad and the Syrian government.
Regarding the newly US-reordered Tunisia and Egypt, Abrams suggests they convene the Arab League and expell Syria as a member, as he claims they just did to Libya. Abrams' suggestion echos fellow globalist policy wonk Kenneth Pollack's proposal in his Brookings Institutes report, "Bifurcating the Middle East." Bifurcate, meaning to "divide," indicates the classic gambit of divide and conquer is in play. Pollack, like Abrams, suggests that the "Arab street" after being "reformed" be rallied against states like Libya, Syria, and of course, Iran.
Abrams also suggests that Europe begin acting against Syria. Nicolas Sarkozy of France seems to have gotten the memo and is already making lofty threats toward Syria, including threats of military action, citing the ongoing atrocity in Libya as a stern warning for other Arab nations to consider. Sanctions are also being pushed by Abrams, but to what extent the Europeans are willing to carry them out remains to be seen.
Finally, Abrams suggests that the US pull its ambassador from Syria, reiterating his belief that it was a mistake in the first place to show this token sign of mutual respect for the sovereign nation. He concludes with a breathtakingly absurd display of patriotism and propaganda by stating,
"Our principles alone should lead us to this position, but the memory of thousands of American soldiers killed in Iraq with the help of the Assad regime demands that we do all we can to help the Syrian people free themselves of that evil dictatorship."
And help the US is, with the entire opposition being funded, defended, supported, and even partially based out of the United States and England.
Strange that Abrams has implicated Assad as complicit in killing US troops in Iraq, when Abrams himself and his "Neo-Con" cabal have hands-down done more to send US troops off to their needless deaths with their willful lying regarding WMD's, than any Arab with a Kalashnikov.
Also interesting, considering his statement, is Abrams' support for the armed campaign in Libya, where the US is currently providing air support and arms for Al Qaeda linked rebels who themselves have sent fighters to Iraq to kill American troops, on record.
Of course, Abrams is writing for the impressionable readership of the Washington Post, so this blinding hypocrisy is most likely fodder strictly for the public's consumption. However, sweeping aside the propaganda, we see a very real strategy already beginning to play out in regards to Syria.
Let us remember that this is already a plan in motion, and recognize the surprise displayed by our feckless "leadership" as the poorly-feigned act that it is.
Noor: Who is this criminal neocon Abrams that he has such say after a record such as he has created for himself? Why should this buzztard have an audience? Why does he have ANY power at all?
This is a gutless, spineless, manipulative, black-souled neocon thinks nothing of sending others to die obeying his hawkish wishes, but will not go himself! Rather an armchair soldier who should be shown the door and shoved into a bottomless pit.
Let us all remember, Israel and its American lapdog will also stop at nothing in their goal to surround Iran. Once that goal is accomplished, if it is accomplished, then the entire world, not just Iran, will be in trouble.
Abrams and a buddy.
ROAD MAP TO NOWHERE:
The Return of Elliott Abrams
March, 30, 2004
Elliott Abrams was infamous for the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s. Now Bush has appointed him to the National Security Council to “mediate” the Israeli-Palestinian problem. “Aggravate” is more like it unfortunately.
If you are looking for reasons why the Middle East peace process is as deadlocked as usual, here is one big reason: The infamous Elliott Abrams, major figure in the Iran-Contra scandal of the 80s and all-purpose apologist for Central American human rights atrocities, has been appointed to a high-level post within the National Security Council.
In December 2002, Bush appointed Abrams to become senior director of the Near East and North Africa office of the NSC. This appointment effectively makes him the behind-the-scenes point man on the administration’s efforts to mediate the Israeli/Palestinian problem.
Abrams once wrote, “American Jews must arise from their slumber and face the facts that peace will never happen.” This from the man who President Bush picked to head his peace effort.
James Zogby of the Arab-American Institute (AAI) said of the appointment: “He will be yet another filter blocking reality from the president.”
Rashid Khalidi, respected Middle Eastern scholar at the University of Chicago, said: “This is a tragedy for the American people as well as for Palestinians and Israelis.” He refers to Abrams and the like as “American Likudniks.”
Retired admiral and diplomat William Crowe said: “He’s a snake who is hard to kill.”
The consensus is that Abrams ended up with this job instead of others because NSC appointments don’t require Senate confirmation, which would have been a major embarrassment for the administration. Abrams has a well-deserved reputation for lying under oath and showing contempt and hostility for anyone who dares question him about his inept and sordid past. He once referred to critics as “vipers.”
Like previous assignments for which he clearly had no qualifications, Abrams came to this high-level position in the NSC without any expertise on the Middle East. His only qualification, it seems, was a relentless hostility towards the Palestinian peace efforts of the past, and his unwavering and uncritical support of Israel.
Abrams never saw an Israeli action or military intervention he didn’t like. His support for Sharon borders on adoration, and his dismissal of Palestinian aspirations is well documented in his own writings and public statements.
In 1982, Ariel Sharon left office in disgrace after a commission found him complicit in the massacre of many civilian Muslims in the Lebanese refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila.
Abrams was contemptuous of the decision, claiming that Sharon’s forces had merely stood by and allowed the massacres to take place. It is frightening to think that a man with this kind of moral numbness is now formulating Middle East policy in the name of the American people.
Abrams’ convoluted approach to the Middle East is documented in his book Present Dangers which was produced by the Netcom think tank “Project for the New American Century.” Abrams wrote: “Our military strength and willingness to use it should be our key factor in promoting peace.”
He also wrote, “Our intentions in the Middle East will not be realized for the most part through painstaking negotiations.”
In other words, might equals right ~ our might gives us the right to impose our will on the Palestinians. And Americans wonder why so many people in that region fear and distrust us.
The question becomes why did President Bush think Elliott Abrams was the man for this important job if he was serious about working for a fair and just peace for the Palestinians?
For the Arab-American community, the appointment of Abrams was the final straw that convinced them that the Bush Road Map to Peace was just a public-relations snow job. It is hard to argue to the contrary.
Behind the scenes, one of the most vocal critics to the Abrams appointment was George Bush Sr.’s highly respected NSC chairman, Brent Scowcroft. The first Bush administration declined to ever hire Abrams during its four years in office.
It wanted nothing to do with his disgraceful reputation as Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (1985-1989) during the Reagan presidency ~ one of several assignments Abrams was given for which he had no obvious qualifications other than being known as a Cold War hawk and a right-wing ideologue, which Bush Sr. decidedly was not.
In his post as assistant secretary (1985-1989) Abrams consistently defended the brutal El Salvador dictatorship against an avalanche of human-rights-abuse charges ~ over 22,000 atrocities in a 12-year period, including the infamous El Mozote village massacre. In a 1992 National Review article, Abrams wrote of our role in El Salvador: “American policy was right, and it was successful.”
Nor did Bush Sr. want anything to do with Abrams’ complicity in the Iran-Contra fiasco. Abrams was indicted by the special prosecutor for giving false testimony to a congressional committee and for illegal fund-raising for the Contras. He pleaded guilty to two lesser charges in the hope of avoiding a trial. But for reasons still not understood today, Bush Sr., just before leaving office, pardoned Abrams and others saving them from having to serve jail time.
Not true! The turmoil in the Middle East is a festering sore that drains our attention, resources, and political capital ~ not to mention our good name. As long as it goes unsettled and unresolved in a fair and just manner for both sides, it will remain so. The people our government appoints to work on this problem must be of unassailable character and integrity. They represent all of us.
Elliott Abrams fails on all accounts ~ therefore, we would all fail with him.
We cannot afford to fail ~ therefore, Abrams must go.
Noor: Yet this criminal loser, obviously still a pet of Israel, still is in a position to spew his warmongering filth and aspirations (the wishes of Israel) to the world!
No comments:
Post a Comment
If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.