The Passionate Attachment

America's entanglement with Israel

The Wake-Up May Be Too Late

with 7 comments

By Philip Giraldi
The Passionate Attachment
June 27, 2012

Is it possible that Americans are finally waking up to the dangers resulting from Washington’s involvement in Israel’s foreign policy? In the New York Times on June 24th there was an astonishing feature opinion piece by Professor Misha Glenny writing from London about “A Weapon We Can’t Control.” The editorial slammed the “decision by the United States and Israel to develop and then deploy the Stuxnet computer worm against an Iranian nuclear facility,” describing the development as a “significant and dangerous turning point in the gradual militarization of the internet.” Glenny warned that to use such a devastating weapon in peacetime will “very likely lead to the spread of similar and still more powerful offensive cyberweaponry across the Internet,” also noting that “virus developers generally lose control of their inventions, which will inevitably seek out and attack the networks of innocent parties.”

Glenny also mentioned the second generation Flame virus, developed jointly by Israel and the US, and which has now spread to computers throughout the Middle East.

On the same day in the same issue of the Times, Jimmy Carter chimed in with an op-ed, “A Cruel and Unusual Record,” which asserted that “Revelations that top officials are targeting people to be assassinated abroad, including American citizens, are only the most recent, disturbing proof of how far our nation’s violation of human rights has extended.” Carter did not mention Israel or name President Obama, but the decade long transition of the United States into a nation that believes itself to be above the law, following the Israeli example, would have been all too clear for the reader.

One day before the editorial and op-ed’s appearance, there was also another emperor’s new clothes moment at the Times. Regular columnist Nicholas Kristof had just completed a trip across Iran with his family in tow. And guess what? He found in “Not-So-Crazy in Tehran” that Iran was a “complex country,” not a police state, has a “vigorous parliament and news media,” and most university students are women who later obtain important jobs after graduation. Kristof’s advice? “Let’s not bluster…or operate on caricatures. And let’s not choose bombs over sanctions…”

I would add that it is about time that people in the United States begin to realize that unlimited support of Israel has turned US foreign policy into the poison that is bidding to destroy the republic.

Alas, over the same weekend that the Times was possibly coming to its senses, Mitt Romney was meeting in Park City Utah with his large donors. At a breakout session to discuss his support of Israel he revealed that he speaks regularly with Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren to get advice on the Middle East. Unseemly does not begin to describe such an arrangement, as Oren is not exactly a disinterested party re the advice he is giving. Oh, and Bill Kristol and Michael Chertoff also spoke to the pro-Israel group.

Philip Giraldi is the executive director of the Council for the National Interest and a recognized authority on international security and counterterrorism issues.

Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

June 27, 2012 at 12:19 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

7 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. While it’s heartening to see opposition to war in the New York Times, I’m not impressed by Kristof’s emperor’s new clothes moment. He just prefers regime change via color revolution rather than by bombing. In a recent op-ed entitled “Pinched and Griping in Iran,” he wrote:

    Yet, with apologies to the many wonderful Iranians who showered me with hospitality, I favor sanctions because I don’t see any other way to pressure the regime on the nuclear issue or ease its grip on power. My takeaway is that sanctions are working pretty well.

    This success makes talk of a military strike on Iranian nuclear sites unwise as well as irresponsible. Aside from the human toll, war would create a nationalist backlash that would cement this regime in place for years to come — just when economic sanctions are increasingly posing a challenge to its survival. No one can predict the timing, but Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen have shown that unpopular regimes that cannot last, don’t.

    “People putting bread on the table, bearing the pressure, they have a limit,” said a businessman I chatted with on a beach of the Caspian Sea. “Sooner or later, the limit will come and things will change.”

    Insha’Allah. (God willing.)

    Maidhc Ó Cathail

    June 27, 2012 at 3:03 pm

  2. Thanks, Maidhc. I could not agree with you more on Kristof’s piece.

    June 28, 2012 at 1:55 am

  3. How Bill Kristol Purged the Arabists (by Patrick J. Buchanan):


    June 28, 2012 at 1:27 pm

  4. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the American people to wake up to the fact that their national interest has been compromised by the Israelists.

    As for Kristof and his preference for sanctions rather than war – the brutal economic sanctions we are laying on Iran are war.

    It’d be one thing if we as a nation decided to forgo trade with Iran for whatever reason but that’s not what we’re doing. We’re threatening other countries with sanctions in order to coerce them into participating in our strangling of Iran. That goes way beyond exercising our freedom of choice according to our conscience and becomes a campaign of extortion to pit the world against a country that hasn’t done anything to us. These are extreme acts and Americans don’t care.


    June 29, 2012 at 6:36 am

  5. Duncan: Americans do care. Unfortunately for you and your love of the brutal mullahs, they care enough to support the sanctions.

    Mark Kerpin

    June 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm

  6. […] Posted in Zionist Threat « Patrick Seale ‘War Clouds over the Greater Middle East’ […]

  7. […] Posted in Zionist Threat « US Boosts Persian Gulf Forces in Warning to Iran […]

Leave a Reply