TPS

A brief visit to congratulate GWB and supporters; my first prediction happens (the easy part). I'M not surprised by the right's reaction here: I suppose that's what's to be expected over the next 4 years--no attempt to dialogue; simply, liberals suck (in so many words). My second prediction, for those who missed it, because DCTOM and the fascists deleted my last post, was that most of you who voted for Bush will regret it before his next term is up. My new prediction: when Bush and the neocons go after Iran next, China will fire-sell their holdings of US T-bills-- because Iran is China's number 1 supplier of oil and gas and just signed a $70 billion contract with Iran to develop a new oil field--which will lead to a financial crisis here as the $ collapses. And I've made a nice little return the past 6 months betting against the $. Hope some of you get a chance to read this before it's deleted... Peace and go Bills! TPS

Finally found something new on the Franklin Affair. Interesting stuff. Update on Franklin Affair

Since when has Israel tried to make peace on the Palestinians terms? I think most outside observers have simply argued for the creation of a Palestinian state. It's apparent Sharon has other plans.. Another perspective...

Yep, you just can't trust the AP..... I'll see if I can find the FT article.

What do you think of this conservative's opinion of Sharon and his relationship with Bush? Scowcroft

The modern Conservative

No, I never said that! I guess if you're not concerned about him, then he's not even a nuisance either... "I'm not that concerned about him"

Not that I trust the Moonie Times... Chechens??

This editorial talks about one of the reasons I hinted at with respect to how the Iraq war benefits Israel. My general point was going to be that the war takes a lot of the international focus off of Sharon and allows him to deal with the Palestinian problem however he wants. Sharon

You're right, maybe the writer did not check his facts. The error is equating Voters Outreach of America with America Votes. I found the following link that mentions the former group: Voters Outreach of America The article is about republican efforts to help Nader get on the Arizona ballot, and mentions the director of VOA. So I don't believe those organizations are one in the same--can't imagine dems throwing out dem registrations. "According to several sources, two of the contractors Sproul hired to oversee petition gathering for No Taxpayer Money For Politicians -- Aaron "A.J." James, who directs Voters' Outreach of America, and Diane Burns -- were also paid by Sproul to get as many signatures as possible for Nader. "

I got a good laugh at your comment that you haven't seen anything about republicans trying to stop democrats from voting; why would Fox or Rush report those stories? Las Vegas

Yes. And it's also about the (stated) Neocon goal of reestablishing "American Empire." Their PNAC document stated they were interested in regime change in Iraq even before Bush got elected. PNAC Oil is bigger than Haliburton. there's an interesting new book out on how the US military is increasingly being used to protect global oil. Oil wars

Point taken. However the only reason I mentioned Pollard was to imply that Israel has certainly spied on us before; it was not to imply the leadership at the Pentagon are spies. Looking through that thread I don't see where "I started off with the spying angle." Look at the title of the thread--Fued between Pentagon and CIA. In fact, what I read from my posts is essentially what I've been arguing here, again. Of course; we are all biased, though most won't admit it, or think their beliefs somehow have a monopoly on truth. There is a lot in that article that I believe is correct; you may not agree. Time will tell. I don't believe that either. What I believe is that the Iraq war was mutually beneficial to the goals of the Neocons (and there are a lot more than 4) and the Likud party, and I'm sure they did things like share information; especially information that helped justify the war. That's not a conspiracy, and it's not spying. Think of it as two special interest groups (Likud Party and Bush Admin) combining their efforts to bring about an outcome that benefits both groups. On a side note, it's embarrassing to re-read an old post and find a spelling error that someone like Richio would make...

My other thread is about the relationship between the Neocons and the hardliners in Israel currently in power. To say that all Israelis support Sharon is equivalent to saying all Americans support Bush. Also, I did not say this war was ALL about Israel.

Analysis And another interesting conclusion: "In other findings, Jaffee Center experts disagreed with the Israeli government's statements that its four-year struggle against Palestinian militants is part of the world fight against Islamic terrorism."

Not sure why you think I've stated there's a global conspiracy. All I've stated is that the interests of the Neocons and the interests of the hardliners in Israel coincide, so it wouldn't surprise me if they help each other in achieving their goals. We've historically supported Israel and its self-determination, so there are many instances where we've worked together because their goals have been consistent with our goals, and they've been in the best interest of the US--no conspiracy. The difference this time, I don't believe the goals of the Neocons is in the best interest of the US. From what I've read, there seem to be a lot of people in the State Dept and CIA who are also opposed to the Neocon agenda because they must believe that as well. Here's one example (there are several others from different people) of an article by another "Anonymous" CIA analyst who summarizes the issue in an article speculating what will happen after Powell resigns in term 2. Anonymous I'm not so naive as to think these kinds of machinations don't go on.

I'll respond to the first question when I have more time--this is where many of us have fundamental differences. Second point, not at all. Once again, YOU made it seem outlandish that Israel could spy on the US; but you know otherwise. Are they currently? It's possible, but I don't think need to because they have a close enough relationship with the Neocons. Third point: once again you are trying to put words in my mouth. I never made the allegation. Most of the time when I post an article like that I pose a question like, "Israeli spying at the Pentagon?" As a lead-in to the article. I would appreciate it if you could find the post where I made the allegation, and then backed down from it. While I read a couple of articles on it, I don't remember ever seeing any resolution. What I also seem to remember, is that I viewed it as yet another battle between the Neocon Pentagon and their opponents at other security agencies. Like that article I posted about the CIA waging an "insurgency" against the administration; it might have been another attempt by the CIA to embarrass and discredit the Neocons...??

I agree, those are goals and reasons why we've always been aligned with Israel. The neocons have grander goals in mind. I made the spy statement because you made it sound ludicrous that Israel would have spies in the Pentagon. There is currently an investigation of Israeli spying in the Pentagon, so I was not only thinking of Pollard. That said, I don't believe that some of the top officials that you mentioned are spies, nor are they beholden to Sharon. However, their goal of using military force to bring "democracy" to the ME certainly helps Israel and Sharon in more ways than just eliminating enemies. I think their domino theory will fail and create more instability and more terrorists, neither of which is good for US.

I don't know, but my guess is that it wouldn't be much different than the administration's at the time; unlike now.

Oh, the irony....

Your's and Ed's comments say a lot about how you guys form your thoughts and opinions. Ed makes a judgement about me from the title of my post without reading the article, and you accept his judgement without reading the article, and ignore my admonishment to him about not reading the article. The title of my post is based upon an analogy mentioned by the WSJ in the article that the Bush administration is fighting two insurgencies: one in Iraq, and one in the CIA. From now on I will label my titles for their degree of difficulty: Richio for the lowest degree of comprehension necessary, DCTom for the highest....

As I just stated, I believe that the goals of the Neocons are consistent with the goals of hardline Israelis, so it wouldn't surprise me if they helped each other achieve their goals. If the Neocon goals are in the best interest of the US, then it's not a bad thing; but I don't believe they are. Yes, I am absolutely guilty of posting articles about the battles between the Neocon-controlled Pentagon and the State Dept or the CIA. That tells me there are people who in those agencies who also believe that the interests of the Neocons are not in the best interests of the US. As for spies, Israel would never infiltrate US security agencies, would they?

Sadley, you idiotically decided to comment on my title without reading the article.

My interpretation of the article, or at least the part you focus on, is that the goals of the Neocons are consistent with Israel's goals. That doesn't mean they are conspiring to help Israel;however, it does imply that they may help each other achieve their goals. I certainly believe that is plausible. There are people who do believe that some of the neocons are in bed with Israel--Pat Buchanan for example. I posted the article because of Robert's criticism that Kerry and Bush do not differ much on Iraq, not for what you tried to pull out of it.

I stated a couple of years ago that I thought Iraq was (mainly) about two things: Israel and oil. I've posted many articles by former and current CIA analysts that said the same thing. One doesn't have to be a spy to support those goals; the US has always supported Israel, and we've always tried to keep supply of ME oil to the US open. Other than that, your insinuations of what I'm saying are assinine. But for some reason you always feel the need to attack me, so I'm used to it.