Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Finally, the Neocons Are Sinking

By Khody Akhavi, IPS News. Posted June 25, 2007.


As the George W. Bush administration struggles through its last two years in office, it appears that the agenda of neoconservative ideologues has finally lost its appeal among strategic parts of the U.S. foreign policy apparatus.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Khody Akhavi

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

As the George W. Bush administration struggles through its last two years in office, it appears that the agenda of neoconservative ideologues has finally lost its appeal among strategic parts of the U.S. foreign policy apparatus.

But as their influence has waned at the Pentagon and State Department, neo-conservative hawks have taken charge on the battlefield of public diplomacy.

Intent on fixing what American Enterprise Institute (AEI) fellow Joshua Muravchik termed Bush's "public diplomacy mess," right-wing hawks have gained control of the weapons in the "war of ideas" -- U.S. government-funded and supported media outlets such as Voice of America (VOA), Al-Hurra, and Radio Farda, which broadcast to the Middle East and aim to offer an alternative view of the news.

The recent appointment of Jeffrey Gedmin, a veteran neo-conservative polemicist, as the director of Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty (RFE), and a smear campaign that led to the recent resignation of Larry Register, Al-Hurra's former news director, appears to herald a turn towards more ideologically rigid programming.

As a result, viewers and listeners of U.S.-supported media in the Middle East are being exposed to a tougher ideological line that endorses the hallmarks of the neoconservative agenda -- regime change and interventionist policies in the region.

"No group other than neocons is likely to figure out how to do that," wrote Muravchik, in a December 2006 article in Foreign Policy magazine entitled "Operation Comeback", a reference to the declining influence of neo-conservatives in the Bush administration. "We are, after all, a movement whose raison d'etre was combating anti-Americanism in the United States. Who better then to combat it abroad?"

In a widely-circulated email memo sent to White House advisor Karl Rove in July 2006, the former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich also criticised the State Department's inability to manage the information campaign advocating U.S. foreign policy interests in the region.

He called on Karen Hughes, undersecretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs at the State Department, to "run the information operation aimed at delegitimising Syria, Iran and Hezbollah every day."

Earlier this year, a report authored by Ladan Archin, head of the Pentagon's Iran directorate who, in the run-up to the Iraq War, worked in the agency's controversial Office of Special Plans, charged that both VOA's Persian TV service and Radio Farda, a Persian-language radio station that broadcasts from Prague and Washington, were too soft in the their criticism of Iran's regime.

Archin's report, which was obtained by the McClatchy Newspapers Washington bureau, complained that, while VOA's Persian TV service "often invites guests who defend the Islamic Republic's version of issues, it consistently fails to maintain a balance by inviting informed guests who represent another perspective on the same issue."

With the neo-conservative drums beating inside the Washington Beltway, the reshuffling of key positions at REF and Al-Hurra came as no surprise.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced in February a major initiative to promote democracy in Iran, including 50 million dollars to increase Persian-language television broadcasts.

Congress also appropriated 21.4 million dollars to expand VOA's Persian television programming to 12 hours a day, and 14.7 million dollars more for Radio Farda (which means "Tomorrow" in Farsi).

In early 2007, the Broadcasting Board of Governor's chairman, Kenneth Tomlinson, named Gedmin, a former AEI fellow and a founding member, along with Vice President Dick Cheney and former Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, of the Project for a New American Century, as RFE's director. Gedmin's new job gave him control over Radio Farda and Voice of America. Some listeners have since noted changes in the tone and content of their programming.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: neocons, bush administration

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Not out of the woods yet
Posted by: talkville on Jun 25, 2007 1:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shifts in strategy (from military action to propaganda) will not get us out of these woods just yet. The SOA was re-funded by a 6 vote margin just recently; the "center-right" Democratic party is doing all it can to silence and marginalize anything distasteful to their corporate donors. Dressing up the business-as-usual status quo in 'battle of ideas' models changes very little in the actual state of things; they're just minimizing the 'Big Stick' and changing to 'Speak Softly' modes. The fact that these Neo-cons are fading into the back-ground is not to say that they've faded away by any means. We just can't see them as well that's all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ideological corruption goes beyond Neocons: Corporations financing fascism
Posted by: Perfectclue on Jun 25, 2007 3:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is well known, though ideologically filtered out in our safe history books, and servile ideological elites, that the backbone of Nazi Germany was the same corrupt class link between its corrupted middle layers, and the oligarchy. Industrial corporations financed the shock troops, regressive middle layers, who always were servile to class society to begin with, and morphed from class despotism, class democracy, the Weimar regime, into class tyranny, corporate fascsim.

Today we have in the pages of the Wall street, cheerleaders warmongerers, fascists and zionists, who call for the nuclear aggression against Iran. The Amerikan Enterprise Institute is racked with neocons, ziioncons, "expert" idiots, who lied us into the Iraq war, and were used by the same dark forces, the corporate media and its ideological elites who were party to this class nationalism, imperialism. You have here all the same elements in play, same social actors, the corrupted middle class elites, who are financed and rewarded for their class servility and bullying. The corporate fascist state of Mussolini and Hitler was defeated militarily by the allies, but not ideologically. After all, they all once supported Hitler's anti communism, fascism, because the class nationalism which they all share, promoted the attack against the Bolshevik revolution, before it degenerated itself from global class domination and isolation. Only after Hitler turned on the western class society in hopes of being the New bully, Empire on the block, they were forced to confront the ideological rot of their own class ideology.

After the defeat of Corporate fascism in Nazi Germany, this regressive class form and ideology became the norm for Late Capitalism and globalism. The democrats, like the social democrats in the Weimar regime share the same class appeasing, betrayal of democracy, and like the democrats today, opened the back door to its fascsit class thugs, to keep the public at bay, revolting against their class despotism, class tyranny. The democrats and the Barack Obamas and Hillary Clintons opened the back door to these Neocon thugs and Ziocon imperial partners by giving permission to carry out the same fascist foreign policies, and even the right to carry out nuclear aggression withou congressional approval. Their think tanks, are the Brookings Institute and others, but they too are racked with the same class despotism and zionist cheerleaders, some of them even to the right of some Republicans. This is the class mechanism that needs to be dismantled, both the oligarchy and its corrupted class hierarchies, if we are to have a true democracy, instead of this slide towards dictatorship and fascism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"We have scotched the snake not killed it..."
Posted by: Door man on Jun 25, 2007 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not until Bill Kristol is shunned by all save Fox news will we begin to get out from under the influence of these control freak neocons.

Cheney is another case in point. We need some Democrats to find the backbone to do more than speak and move to either impeach or censure this man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These people won't go away
Posted by: Democritus on Jun 25, 2007 4:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not surprising that the so-called "neo-cons" have found other means of advancing their ideology. It doesn't matter which of our political parties is in power, the neo-cons will be energetically working toward a global government with the United States being "first among equals." Being followers of the cult-philosopher Leo Strauss, they believe in three main ingredients of Straussian thought: (1) a Hobbesian view of human nature with a battle of "all against all"; (2) a government run by elitists who know best how to keep the roiling masses in their place; (3) use of any means, including patriotic lies to ensure that the people remain docile. In short, the neo-conservative philosophy is imperial, dogmatic, elitist, and anti-democratic. It is little wonder that the neo-cons have ancestral ties to Trotsky, although the neo-con vision of world government would have multi-national corporations carry out operations of state, rather than the Communist Party. No matter who the next President turns out to be, and no matter which Party controls Congress, you can be sure that the neo-con thinkers will continue to work towards fulfilling their vision. If they ever get what they want, you can say goodbye to our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: These people won't go away Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: This is B.S. Posted by: SJ
» The original neocons... Posted by: justaguy
» Tainting? Posted by: justaguy
» ...teams of jackals fighting over the remains Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Francis
Posted by: Francis on Jun 25, 2007 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Placing the neocons in charge of taxpayer supported government propaganda organs accomplishes a number of things. First, it insures that anti-American hatred will achieve white-hot temperatures on an ever widening basis, and will bring harm to our lives in countless ways. Secondly, it guarantees that the Middle East will remain embroiled in violence ,which, in the view of neocons is the best thing that could happen. Why? because it insures continued killing of Arabs by Americans (and vice versa)while Israel grows in wealth and power. In addition, ever increasing weapons sales for those neocons who personally profit from international weapons sales are assured. These fortunate few include Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Eliot Abrams and, of course, their Israeli business partners, in short, the people who really matter. Third, America will become poorer and poorer as defense spending continues to climb into the stratosphere, insuring that your children and their children will live in third world conditions save a collection of cheap hi-tech toys to distract them. The escalating impoverishment will feature continually eroding government services of every description. Already we are seeing school systems discontinuing sports programs for the first time in their history, course offerings are being severely cut back, etc. All of these things are connected to disproportionate defense spending, which is, underneath it all, a major part of the fundamental business of these fiends.

Why this article would open with the claim that neocon influence is diminishing is anybody's guess. I would certainly like to see evidence that one single aspect of their toxic influence has been measurably diminished, or any of the damage they have already caused has been repaired. Certainly their think tank business in Washington is booming and it's influence on policy, foreign and domestic, cannot be overestimated.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» As I explain below. Posted by: yellow
Nothing here you can't read in the NY Times
Posted by: beeson on Jun 25, 2007 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Negar Azimi beat Khodi Akhavi to the punch with his in-depth coverage of this topic in yesterday's (June 24) New York Times Magazine. I recommend "Hard Realities of Soft Power" to those interested in learning more about the unintended consequences of another of the Bush administration's bad ideas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't have false confidence....
Posted by: Bozly on Jun 25, 2007 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not a good idea to THINK they are sinking, they may slink off for awhile, move back behind curtains and be somewhat OUT OF SIGHT but a massive error if let them be "out of mind/thought" for "they" are quite ENTRENCHED in and thru out !!! Most do not even realize how long they "planned" for the "takeover" which the rise of GWB into the WH allowed ...Suggest reading such as the PNAC papers, see how far back these old dogs go and who IS aligned in their ranks but have slipped by unnoticed and far from scrutinizations. The stacking of the courts /Justice dept. give you but a shred of insight...even the "clerks" who take the paper work 'in" and "decide" WHERE to file or bury...hired in accord to loyalty/ideologies/etc....They permeate much more than folks realize and it will take great effort to root and route them out let alone render them innocuous. Harder to keep tabs on when NOT "identified"--would have inserted "accountable" as well but such as we have witness, they have rendered "accountabiity" a major NON ISSUE for they skirt such quite deftly as NONE seem able to truly corner nor even show the DESIRE to do so !!
These Bushlerized years of reign have been fraught with egregiousnous that above and beyond what we have EVER had to deal with so brazenly and THE STREETS have and REMAIN EMPTY--if EVER their was "reasonable" reason to IMPEACH a HELM, the Bushlers have proven to be such and yet has NOT happened , they will slink OUT of office and spin that NONE/NOTHING was THEIR fault and that THEY had but the best of intentions and THEY had the "right" ideas" of how to address whatever but it was OTHERS that undermined and therewith caused the massive failurings !!!! It is beyond "gaggable", and it IS a tragedy of major proportions!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SINKING? NO JUST GOING UNDER DIFFERENT TITLES....
Posted by: poppop_schell on Jun 25, 2007 7:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take a look at the CFR credentials of most NeoCons. Then look at the Presidential candidates who are also members of the CFR. Kucinich and Ron Paul head the list of NONMEMBERS and look at how they are being ignored or marginilized by the MSM and the GOP and DP.
That is NOT an accident because both are NONINTERVENTIONISTS.

So IF you want the NeoCons out in 2008, choose between Kucinich and Paul. As for me< I hope each gets the nomination of their party and we have a choice of what size central government we want BUT won't have to worry about being the policeman of the world anymore.

ronpaul2008.com kucinich2008.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sinking or Morphing
Posted by: Gravitas on Jun 25, 2007 8:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether or not they are sinking is an interesting question. But an even bigger question is how did they get to this point. Was there really something about their agenda that appealed to the population. Or are the people of the US so manipulatable they have been reduced to puppet status. Or are these creeps so powerful they have the ability to operate independently of the will of the people. And will they just reinvent themselves later on???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sinking or Morphing Posted by: Lincoln fan
They Are All Neocons Now
Posted by: shinseiji on Jun 25, 2007 10:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Alternet title is strange; it is contradicted by the content of the article, which indicates that "the neocons" are exercising more, and not less, control over the propaganda end of the foreign policy apparatus at least.

But in fact the Alternet header is simply wrong in any case. The Neocon ideology is hegemonic inside the Beltway. That includes Billary, Obama, basically anyone besides Ron Paul and Kucinich. "The neocons" are not in retreat at all; instead they have won a great political victory in the U.S. over the last 6 years.

With the entire political leadership in the Beltway solidly in the neoconservative camp, it will not matter what the apparatchiks in the CIA, Pentagon or State Dept. think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: They Are All Neocons Now Posted by: DCBeltway
Don’t count out the neocons just yet.
Posted by: HughScott on Jun 25, 2007 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This comment is for AlterNet visitors unfamiliar with the rightwing subversive organization, Project for a New American Century (PNAC), whose founders include Gulf War 2 architects Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby, Don Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.

President Bush is connected to PNAC through his brother, Jeb, an original 1997 member.

The White House PNAC Gang approved the organization's published goal of invading Iraq before 9/11. Issued when Clinton was in office, the PNAC position paper eerily predicted that the first preemptive war in U.S. history would be supported by the American people if they suffered a "catastrophic and catalyzing Pearl Harbor-type event" (PNAC's words). Thus, to Bush and his neocon cabal, 9/11 was an excuse to attack Iraq, not a cause.

To achieve their goals. PNAC members recruited an obedient mercenary army. More importantly, absent a draft, the “all-volunteer” force minimized war protests, a key to PNAC’s grand design of starting preemptive conflicts and dominating the world with U.S. military power.

Not coincidentally, it was Rep. Rumsfeld who introduced legislation in Congress to kill the draft. He later joined Cheney in the Pentagon and helped him create no-bid “singe-source” contracts which made both men wealthy war whores

The influence of PNAC was particularly pervasive in 2002. For example, how many AlterNeters know that Senator Joe “Love-Me” Lieberman chaired the White House Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI) established that year by Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director?

A rightwing hawk in liberal clothing, Lieberman rubbed elbows at CLI meetings with PNAC members Jeane Kirkpatrick, Robert Kagan, Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle, William Kristol and James Woolsey.

PNAC's rightwing agenda that made the organization so dangerous existed long before its founding in 1997. If references to the neocon foundation disappeared from Internet archives tomorrow, PNAC would continue to be a problem in the form of another rightwing extremist group with the same imperialist objectives -- the Committee on the Present Danger (CPD).

PNAC, in fact, is an offshoot of CPD which was formed in 1950 to promote anti-Communist actions proposed Paul Nitze and Dean Acheson. Over 30 officials in the Reagan administration were CPD members including the Gipper.

During the Ford presidency, CPD members banded together and founded PNAC, which remained active into 2004. That same year, CPD was reincarnated as Version 2.0.

Because CPD-2 was formed after Gulf War 2 began, its members can deny having influenced Bush’s unjustified invasion of Iraq. Not so with PNAC members, which makes the connection important. The paper trail of signed PNAC letters and reports is like stink on fresh cow dung. The members can’t shake it.

Of 104 CPD-2 members (according to their website), 15 signed PNAC documents:

Midge Decter (PNAC founder)
Steve Forbes (PNAC founder)
Frank Gaffney (PNAC founder)
Norman Podhoretz (PNAC founder)
Ken Adelman
Max M. Kampelman
Clifford May
Edwin Meese
Joshua Muravchik
Mark Palmer
Daniel Pipes
Danielle Pletka
Randy Scheunemann
Stephen J. Solarz
R. James Woolsey
Dov Zakheim

PNAC might be dead, but its members, like rats who deserted a sinking ship, have scurried off to other rightwing Beltway nests -- such as CPD -- eager to overturn the Constitution any way they can. So don't count out the traitors just yet.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam vet and editor of FreedomCentralUSA.com, a nonprofit investigative website dedicated to the destruction of neoconservatism using truth and the Internet as WMDs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dayenta
Posted by: dayenta on Jun 25, 2007 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A stake through the heart is the only way to stop any of these monsters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: dayenta Posted by: opeluboy
What?
Posted by: grayt1 on Jun 25, 2007 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The title of this article, "Finally The Neocons Are Sinking" directly contradicts the actual contents of the article. The actual text shows the neocons gaining ground.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, you're right Posted by: Beck
When the Military Commissions Act is dead
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Jun 25, 2007 12:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the PATRIOT Act has been declared unconstitutional and Habeas Corpus is back, THEN we can star feeling relatively safe. Not before.

Ian

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yabba-dabba-doo!
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Jun 25, 2007 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I woke up this morning and read the local fish-wrappa. Not much happening. Seems the U.S. Military is having trouble recrutin nigras but we gotta lot of highspaniks to fill the gaps. Gonna run another stab at immigration amnesty but alotta Chrisshuns dun wanna dopt the ten-nuts of the Lowad's Prayuh. War vs. terror ain't goin nowheah but Wall Street and the hedgers can find enuff loopholes to prospuh. Gotta new Brit P.M., whoevah the hell he is and we can be assuahed that he will be tuff on sludge. Oh..the neocants have conned enuff Umericuns and can now dumbinate the mideast. Good, the world will shually be a bettah place dontcha know. Selah!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yabba-dabba-doo! Posted by: kelly.nickell
Neoconservatives Gained Power Temporarily from an Emerging Confluence of Interests
Posted by: yellow on Jun 25, 2007 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
between them and the mainstream leadership. The mainstream leadership wanted to invade Iraq over oil. The Bush Administration's embrace of Neoconservative support in order to create appearances that the war is a matter of Israeli security doesn't prove anything. In 1991, Israeli intelligence provided information about secret plans Saddam had to build a nuclear bomb. Plans were hidden in the Agriculture Ministry building. A standoff between UN Inspection teams and the Iraq military resulted in the UN inspectors transmitting the contents of the documents via communication satillite to the UN. The Israelis were right. This is why Richard Clarke believed that inspection teams should continue their work although by 9/11 there was probably no threat remaining. (John Cooley, Alliance against Baghdad 2005). Israeli concerns about Iraq most probably ceased at this point.

Israel's policy makers were divided on the effect of a US invasion of Iraq. Some thought a weakening of Iraq would empower Israel. The majority actually thought it would only embolden and strengthen Israel's worst enemy, Iran. Further, it would inflame the region making moderate regimes weaker and dealing with the Palestinian issue more difficult. In the end no one benefited. Israel didn't see Iraq as a real threat. When Israel was concerned about Iraq weapons it bombed the Osirik Nuclear Reactor and suffered no consequences. Why should Israel need the US in the Gulf Region. The US buildup in the Gulf began in 1979 when the Shah was overthrown. The Pacific Fleet was gradually being shifted to the Indian Ocean and renamed the rapid deployment force. By 1990, Centcom was on its way to being created with two carrier battle groups being deployed gradually after the end of the Iran/Iraq War. This policy had nothing to do with Israel but rather the loss of the Shah of Iran and the desire to protect the oil producers in the Gulf including Saudi Arabia.

There are some who allege that the war is over Israel's oil which has to be imported by tanker from distant sources bearing high transportation costs. Reopening the old Kirkuk to Haifa pipeline is not an option. It has very low carrying capacity and would have to be rebuilt costing over $400,000/km. Other options are more effective and cheaper. Israel was getting oil from US tankers in the region for a while and even reselling some of the fuel for hard currency.

The neoconservative influence will be gone as soon as new coalitions emerge to challenge them. They are no longer useful because of the failure of their policies and the impracticality of multiple wars everywhere. The neo-conservatives also represented a fraction of US capitalism who sought to benefit from the control of middle eastern oil, the revival of the MIC, and the control of the oil sources of such competitors as China and the EU. The Neoconservatives were obsessed with preventing the decline of US hegemony in a newly unipolar world and were determined to prevent the rise of multipolarity in which US power would be swamped by a new plethora of alliances and interests which would redefine the prevailing international relations configuration replace far flung US military power with regional security blocs. The US feared that it would lose political relevance and power, especially for its 110 global military bases, and struggled to keep its hegemony through starting a long and bloody war in a vital and strategic region. In addition, the globalization of Iraq's economy through privatization and a US corporate invasion to replace the former Iraqi middle class with transnational capital is also a demonstrated motivation. Thus Hegemony, oil, big business, and the military industrial complex were key motives, not Israeli security.

However, paleocons like many of the readers of Alternet find it much easier to blame da Jooooz than to engage in careful and penetrating analysis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Except... Posted by: justaguy
» Nope Posted by: DCBeltway
» Iraq and Iran Posted by: yellow
Minding other peoples busuness.
Posted by: willymack on Jun 25, 2007 1:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why shouldn't the neocrooks mess with other countries? They've done such a splendid job here, right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I don't think you get it. Posted by: yellow
Hillary our Next President and Another Neocon: $5 gallon gas on the way!
Posted by: sofla100 on Jun 25, 2007 2:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No way, I am afraid, that the neocons are sinking. Not when you consider they still have their sights on Iran. The entire Middle East is now destabilized thanks to the Iraq invasion of Bush II. The neocons in both Washington and Tel Aviv are licking their chopps in victory, not defeat. American power will need to be spread to Iran they believe. And, what better way then from the American financed platform of Israel.? As for our next president, Hillary, just what separates her from the neocon agenda anyway? She supported the Iraq invasion, she supports increased military and "homeland security" spending. She is totally AIPAC bought and paid for (just like Rudy) Just look at who is giving her money and financing her campaigning. Corporate America, to the tune of milliions. The defense industry is big business in America, and it is intricately linked to the Middle East/Israel. These guys don't care who gets burned. As for $5 a gallon gas, that price will be cheap within 2 years. And, it will be no sweat for them, we all know who will be getting the profits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A minor but intriguing point. . .
Posted by: Ellen Remore on Jun 25, 2007 2:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find the phrase "anti-Americanism within the United States" almost eerily Orwellian. Particularly when I speculate about its actual meaning. . . my guess would be any public questioning of the policy of global domination through military imperialism, or any expression of disapprobation of it. Sadly enough, being a cheerleader for the U.S. garrison of the planet seems to be what's passing for "Americanism" these days. And I'm afraid the rise or fall of the neo-cons' fortunes, at this juncture, will have little effect on the trajectory of the repulsive snowball they started.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well said (nm) Posted by: justaguy
The American Empire is getting new handlers?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jun 25, 2007 3:25 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe that would be a better title for this article. The policy of the government remains essentially unchanged, neocons or no neocons. Instead of Rumsfeld, you have Robert Gates - both have strong ties to the Reagan Administration that was responsible for creating the Taliban in the first place, as well as for setting up Saddam.

'Neocon' is a modern term that has little real meaning, other than in perhaps referring to the collaboration between rabid Zionists and crazy religious right Republicans - but many of those people were also from the Iran-Contra era.

The effort is now all going into a massive public facelift for the Bush Administration and the Republican Party. This will involve attempting to distance all Republican presidential candidates from Bush&Cheney, as well at to get 'the new image of conservatism' out into the public mind - as exemplified by the candidacy of Fred Thompson.

If you pay attention, you'll see the Republican PR being rolled out all over the place - the 'new conservatives', the 'earnest, honest Midwesterners', etc. etc. What else can
they do?

The names have changed, but the policy remains the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No, they're not
Posted by: opeluboy on Jun 25, 2007 4:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The neocons are not going anywhere. They own the media, they control foreign policy and both parties bow to them.

By the way, just read that now 41% of our stupid countrymen think Saddam Hussein was involved with 9-11. That is up 5 points since 2004.

Yeah, the neocons are sinking. Right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No, they're not Posted by: VZEQICVA
» Opulboy, you moron. Posted by: yellow
» RE: Opulboy, you moron. Posted by: opeluboy
» RE: Opulboy, you moron. Posted by: Francis
Invasion Option Squelched: Real Reason Why the Neocons Fear Iranian Nukes
Posted by: sofla100 on Jun 25, 2007 5:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real reason the neocons fear Iranian nukes is not the probability of an attack by Iran with nukes. Such an attack would be suicide and not necessary either. Why? Because no one is going to attack a nuclear armed Iran. To include Israel and the USA. Now Israel, in possession of a good 200+ nukes, is also not going to be attacked or conquered either. Rhetoric aside, Israel's problems are due to her unresolved Palestinian and Arab lands questions, Israel survival has long ago ceased even being a question (despite the propagana otherwise). So, the problem the neocons have is that Iran is going to redress the power balance in the Middle East if she possesses nukes. The days of the old USA style gunboat diplomacy, that is, give me your oil, on the cheap, OR ELSE!, will be gone for good. Regardless of what happens with Iraq. That is why the neocons are really afraid and really upset.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"NeoCon" is Merely a Label...
Posted by: Hal on Jun 25, 2007 5:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As others have as much said, look past labels to who now promotes blood money corporate monopoly agenda from a cesspit Washington-MSM carny show.

Temp actors may change but the sick game dictated by a de facto corporate crime state remains the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hal what up? Posted by: yellow
The Gas Centrafuge Enrichment plant at Natanz can produce enough U-235 for a Nuke
Posted by: yellow on Jun 25, 2007 8:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but can't sustain the 20,000 megawatt reactors for which the Iranians claim to want to use the enriched U-235. According to an interview given by Nuclear Expert Shannon Kile of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute to RFE/RL, Iran's enrichment program cannot sustain an ongoing electrical generation program but can only make enough enriched U-235 for nuclear weapons. Iran is having problems sustaining the enrichment process.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nope can't see anything there. Posted by: justaguy
Neocons are Zionists - So says Israelis themselves
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jun 26, 2007 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As, Uri Avnery wrote back in 2003:
"...Second, the small group that initiated this war--an alliance of Christian fundamentalists and Jewish neo-conservatives--has won big, and from now on it will control Washington almost without limits.

The combination of these two facts constitutes a danger to the world, and especially to the Middle East, the Arab peoples and the future of Israel. Because this alliance is the enemy of peaceful solutions, the enemy of the Arab governments, the enemy of the Palestinian people and especially the enemy of the Israeli peace camp.

It does not dream only about an American empire, in the style of the Roman one, but also of an Israeli mini-empire, under the control of the extreme right and the settlers. It wants to change the regimes in all Arab countries. It will cause permanent chaos in the region, the consequences of which it is impossible to foresee.
Its mental world consists of a mixture of ideological fervor and crass material interests, an exaggerated American patriotism and right-wing Zionism..."

Uri Avnery further goes to describe who the neocons are:
"They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers.

For many years, this was a marginal group that fostered a right-wing agenda in all fields. They fought against abortion, homosexuality, pornography and drugs. When Binyamin Netanyahu assumed power in Israel, they offered him advise on how to fight the Arabs.

Their big moment arrived with the collapse of the Twin Towers. The American public and politicians were in a state of shock, completely disoriented, unable to understand a world that had changed overnight. The neo-cons were the only group with a ready explanation and a solution. Only nine days after the outrage, William Kristol (the son of the group's founder, Irving Kristol) published an Open Letter to President Bush, asserting that it was not enough to annihilate the network of Osama bin Laden, but that it was also imperative to "remove Saddam Hussein from power" and to "retaliate" against Syria and Iran for supporting Hizbullah."

So to all the Zionist trolls pinning the blame of Iraq war on US corporate interests, I say nice try, but even Israelis understand that Zionists played a huge role in this war, and it ain't good for Jews in the long run:

"Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of world power.
But this tendency troubles me. We are like a gambler, who bets all his money and his future on one horse. A good horse, a horse with no current competitor, but still one horse.

The neo-cons will cause a long period of chaos in the Arab and Muslim world. The Iraqi war has already shown that their understanding of Arab realities is shaky. Their political assumptions did not stand the test, only brute force saved their undertaking.
Some day the Americans will go home, but we shall remain here. We have to live with the Arab peoples. Chaos in the Arab world endangers our future.
Wolfowitz and Co. may dream about a democratic, liberal, Zionist and America-loving Middle East, but the result of their adventures may well turn out to be a fanatical and fundamentalist region that will threaten our very existence.
The partnership of the neo-cons and the Christian fundamentalists may engender counter-forces in Washington. And if Bush is defeated in the next election, like his father after his victory in the first Gulf War, this whole gang will be thrown out. "

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I like dumb Zionists like you... Posted by: Ydotheyhateus
» RE: You are one pathetic moron!! Posted by: kelly.nickell
» Read my post above. Posted by: yellow
In Case It Escaped Your Notice The UN Security Council Voted for Three Resolutions
Posted by: yellow on Jul 1, 2007 11:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to sanction Iran for its 18 year old nuclear enrichment program. These include UNSCRs 1696, 1737, and 1747. They demand that Iran be forthcoming with its nuclear enrichment program and abide by the rules requiring regular IAEA inspectors to ensure compliance with international safety standards as well as half efforts to make a bomb. These resolutions are supported by the US, the EU, Russia, China, and others. Opposing Iran's nuclear program and wanting to ensure non-proliferation in the Gulf is hardly a Zionist objective. Nuclear non-proliferation is a widely supported objective and bombs won't help Muslim powers get what they want. They have no military option. They must negotiate. Ahmedinijad is weak, by the way. I don't believe he will last.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]