Presidential advisors say a lot about the candidates

From Michael, via email:

ADVISORS TO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES GO INTO ACTION

by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East Analyst & Commentator It has just been reported that Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter will be tripping to Syria to confer with President Bashar Assad. Since neither has official government standing as diplomats sent on any mission we know about, start to look for hidden agenda(s).

Zbigniew Brzezinski is a political advisor to Barack Obama. Carter has not yet announced his preference. Brzezinski and Carter have two things in common when it comes to the Middle East. They both exude hate, I repeat "HATE!" for the Jewish State of Israel.

As I recall, when Brzezinski was in government, it was reported that he commented that a "little bit of anti-Semitism was a good thing."

As for Jimmy Carter, his recent book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" was a virtual screed against the Jewish State.

If Brzezinski and Carter are visiting Syria's Bashar, one can be assumed nothing good will be said about the Jewish State between these three haters of Jews in the Jewish State. It's worth keeping an eye on what will be said publically after their mission is complete. The question now arises: "What these two anti-Semitic advisors have to do with a Presidential candidate, Barack Obama - who has said repeatedly that he didn't know they were making a trip to Syria?"

(One thing on their agenda might be that PM Olmert plans to transfer the Golan Heights to Syria in a Faustian bargain.)

Something smells but, it hasn't ripened sufficiently to see what mischief these two are up to - at the behest of President Bush and Secretary of State Rice.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) Report that seemed to force Bush to back off taking out Iran imminent nuclear capabilities? That has many more questions attached to the motive of its authors, that is, 16 American Intelligence Agencies.

Did Bush want such a Report so he could ease up on Iran and give Iran breathing room, followed by a grateful Iran pay-back - slowing shipments of weapons to Terrorists in Iraq, and the transfer of Terrorists themselves (euphemistically called "insurgents"). That sleight of hand would make it appear as if America was winning the war in Iraq temporarily and then the Terrorists would  "surge" back, as the Taliban are now doing in Afghanistan.

If so, is the same deal to be offered to Bashar Assad of Syria so he will temporarily lower his aggressive foot print in Lebanon (through Hezb'Allah)?

Any time a U.S. Administration plays footsie with Terrorists - as we did when we helped train Osama Bin Laden's Taliban Terrorists in Afghanistan in their war against the Soviets, we literally "reap the whirlwind" we have sown. We train Terrorists to defeat a superior military force and then there is "blowback" when the CIA-trained Terrorists return, fully trained and  armed to blow up our Western cities and/or soldiers.

One is reminded of the present training and arming by the CIA of the Fatah Terrorists ("militants") of PA President Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen). In a short time they will likely re-join Hamas as a powerful and united trained Terrorist Military.

I do not mean to confuse you with these interconnecting events but, that's exactly it. They are interconnecting.

Another spot of worry on the "Rolling Horizon"** is as follows:

Among the candidates, John McCain said that, if he were President, he would send James Baker III (Father Bush's Secretary of State) and Brent Scowcroft (Father Bush's National Security Director) to the Middle East. The next question is: For what?

Baker is well known for his ties to Saudi Arabia's oil sheiks and kings, in addition to Syria. His visceral hatred for Israel is a big problem. His record of biased meddling is replete with horror stories. He gave the "green light" to Saddam Hussein via his Ambassadress April Glaspie to the effect that America had no interest in Saddam's border disputes with Kuwait....thereby giving Saddam the "green light" to invade Kuwait in 1990 so Saddam could confiscate $80 Billion in Saudi assets, allowing him to pay his arms' debt and continue to buy American weapons to war with Iran..

Thus began Saddam's invasion of Kuwait August 2, 1990. We are all still feeling the effects of that invasion today. Baker officially denied that he gave the "green light" to invade.

A visit to Hafez al Assad of Syria when Baker was Secretary of State still has clouds hanging over it. Israel had given Baker confidential intelligence about Syria which Baker then revealed to Assad. (Baker, of course, denied the breach.) Assad was able to use the information to roll up an Israeli spy network in Syria and execute everyone. But, Baker denied responsibility for these deaths as well as the end of Humint (Human Intel) in Syria, which Israel had been providing to America.

Scowcroft, as another member of President (#41) George Herbert Walker Bush's Cabinet was given a waiver (read: a pre-pardon) along with Bush's entire Cabinet for any business dealing they had with Saddam Hussein just before U.S. Forces attacked Saddam in Kuwait, January 17, 1991.

Don't forget, Saddam starting lobbing SCUD missiles at Israel 2 A.M. on January 17, 1991. Orders came to PM Shamir NOT to retaliate and the U.S. would take out the missile launchers. A Report from the GAO (General Accounting Office) after the War concluded that the U.S. never tried to eliminate the Iraqi SCUD launchers. So the Israelis spent the entire First Gulf War, carrying gas masks and tents for their babies, running to plastic-and-duct-tape sealed rooms while 39 SCUDs hit Israel, thanks to President George H.W. Bush, Secretary of State James Baker III, Secretary of Defense Powell and National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, etc.

It was also believed at the time that Scowcroft and other members of George H.W. Bush's Cabinet were instrumental in furnishing arms indirectly to Saddam.

Why would John McCain want to send Baker and Scowcroft as his representatives to the Middle East, given their close prior association with Syria, Saudi Arabia and especially their hostility to Israel?

Much to ponder and question!

One last thought:

Since Brzezinski, Carter, Baker and Scowcroft all have similar career backgrounds (even though they may be in opposite political parties) and what you might call similar psychological profiles, it's not out of the question that they may now be working together toward the same goals.

Naturally, the Arabist State Department would be in the mix as the interface and working the levers behind the curtain. Moreover, given their identical visceral hatred for Israel, one might leap to the conclusion that Israel is to be eliminated in deference to the oil bandits who control the production of oil that flows from the Saudis, the Gulf States and Iran - now approaching $100 a barrel.

Is the game plan to sacrifice Israel as the coin of appeasement in the hope that all the Terror will cease? Naturally, they would have to recruit the Israeli government into participating in their unwitting demise. (Olmert, Barak, Livni and Peres are fulfilling what is expected of them in this Faustian bargain.)

Interesting how these advisors to presidential candidates were divvied up. Each has someone influential in the candidate's camp so whoever wins will be under the control of this cabal. It's so clever one would have thought the Jesuits had planned it.

A follow-on question for any investigative reporters should be: "If they are working together, for whom are they actually working?" (I refer to you to several of my past articles which speak about an ever-present "Shadow Government" By The Pro-Arab State Department" which influences practically all American foreign policy and doctrine. (1)

Let us not forget that it was James Baker, at the behest of President Bush, working with Condoleezza Rice who drafted the"Road Map" through his Institute at Rice University.

###

**"Rolling Horizon" = in round world, the horizon recedes as you approach, i.e., it "Rolls" forward.

1. "SHADOW GOVERNMENT" by the PRO-ARAB STATE DEPARTMENT" Sep. 7, 2004

**********************************************************************************************************

P.S. Just as I had finished the above article, I received the attached Email on the same subject:

A Glimpse into Obama's West Wing:

Extract from an article by Ed Lasky of The American Thinker

For Lasky's full piece follow this link:http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obama_and_israel.html

Every Presidential candidate assembles a foreign policy team of advisers. A glimpse into the makeup of Obama's team has leaked to the media.

Martin Peretz of The New Republic -- a supporter of Obama and of Israel -- had this to say about Obama's Foreign Policy team:

"I have my qualms, as you may know, about Barack Obama, and most especially about what his foreign policy might be. If elected (and actually before he were to be elected), the first decision he would have to make would be who would represent him in the transition to power from early November to January 20. And, frankly, I get the shudders since he has indicated that, among others, they would be Zbigniew Brzezinski (I don't know much about his son, listed as Mark, but I can guess), Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Robert O. Malley."

Lake and Brzezinski both earned their spurs in the Carter Administration. The Carter era led to the fall of the Shah of Iran (a stalwart ally of both America and Israel), which gave birth to the Iranian revolution. We all know how well that has turned out. Jimmy Carter, of course, has led a very public campaign of vilification against Israel-defaming it as an apartheid state (a view Obama's Pastor would concur with). Anthony Lake has been all but retired for the last dozen years-living on a farm in the Berkshires. This makes one wonder what he is bringing to the table, other than his Carter-era pedigree and beliefs. He has been reactivated though-one of his roles seems to be as ambassador to the Arab-American community. The appointment of Brzezinski elicited much dismay among supporters of Israel since Brzezinski is well known for his aggressive dislike of Israel. . He has been an ardent foe of Israel for over three decades and newspaper files are littered with his screeds against Israel. Brzezinski has publicly defended the Walt-Mearsheimer thesis that the relationship between America and Israel is based not on shared values and common threats but is the product of Jewish pressure. Brzezinski also signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas-a group whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel and is filled with threats to Jews around the world.

After Hezbollah launched attacks against Israel in the summer of 2006, murdered Israelis and took hostages, Israel tried to get its citizens back by moving into Lebanon. Warfare resulted. Brzezinski wrote that Israel's actions amounted to the "killing of hostages" (the hostages being Lebanese caught in the battles). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/zbig-brzezinski-israel_b_25821.html Brzezinski's son, Mark, is also on Obama's foreign policy team. Evidently the apple does not fall far from the tree. Mark recently co-wrote an op-ed advocating that America forge ties with Iran.

Susan Rice was John Kerry's chief foreign policy adviser when he ran for President. One of the major steps Kerry suggested for dealing with the Middle East was to appoint James Baker and Jimmy Carter as negotiators. When furor erupted at the prospect of two of the most ardent foes of Israel being suggested to basically ride "roughshod" over Israel, Kerry backtracked and blamed his staff for the idea. His staff was Susan Rice.

Drilling down further we have Robert Malley. He was part of the American negotiating team that dealt with Yasser Arafat at Camp David. He has presented a revisionist history of those negotiations since then: presenting a view that blames Israel for the failures of the negotiations. His version has been radically at odds with the views of Americans and Israelis (including the views of American Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross-also an adviser to Obama- and President Clinton).

He has spent years representing the Palestinian point of view, co-writing a series of anti-Israel articles with Hussein Agha-a former Arafat adviser. Palestinian advocate. These have appeared in the New York Review of Books a publication that has served as a platform for a slew of anti-Israel advocates from Tony Judt to the aforementioned George Soros to the authors of the Israeli Lobby book Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer. Malley has also called settlements "colonies" -- implicitly condemning Israel as a "colonial" state. His writings have been so critical of Israel that the media-monitoring group CAMERA has a "dossier" on him. (CAMERA also has a listing for Brzezinski).

Then there is this disconcerting article in the Financial Times about Democratic Presidential candidates and Israel. One of the key advisers to one of the Presidential candidates admitted to some tactical moves to garner pro-Israel support in America:

"The plain fact is there is no upside for candidates to challenge the prevailing assumptions about Israel," said one of their advisers, who asked not to be named. "The best strategy is to win the White House and then change the debate."

One well-regarded blogger, Rutgers Professor Judith Apter Klinghoffer believes this adviser was Ivo Daalder, who was quoted throughout the article and who is one of the foreign policy advisers to Barack Obama. Professor Klinghoffer is skeptical about Daalder and his feelings towards the American-Israel relationship.

A snapshot of Daalder's views: He has, like Obama, singled out Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz as being responsible for manipulating the levers of power to serve the interests of other countries (it bears reiterating, Perle had no official position in the Administration; Bush, Powell ,Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice-those were the decision-makers). Daalder has seemingly advocated talks with Hezbollah, Syria, Iran. Daalder stated that Israel's bombing of Qana (an attack targeting Hezbollah missile placements that resulted in civilian death) in the war against Hezbollah imperiled Israel's claim to the moral high ground. These and assorted other positions lend credence to Professor Klinghoffer's view. [Remember that the QANA story was exposed as "fauxtography" by LittleGreenFootballs.com. The front page photos were staged. Winston note]

Scott Lasensky has also been appointed a foreign policy adviser to Obama. This step should also be viewed with a gimlet eye. In a book to be published this month, he and co-author Daniel Kurtzer write glowingly of the George H.W. Bush and James Baker's approach towards dealing with Israel, but faulted Bush and Baker for inadequately derailing the pro-Israel lobby which was more skeptical of the push against Israel into Yasser Arafat's arms.

He has called for Islamists and Hamas to be brought into the "peace process," before this Mideast moment slips away.

He has called residents of Israeli settlements "obstructionists" He has been given the stamp of approval by the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, a notoriously harsh anti-Israel group .

He was also used by CNN's Christiane Amanpour to castigate Israel in her widely criticized CNN's Jewish Warriors "documentary" -- a documentary heavily criticized for its bias and factual errors.)

Lasensky has been hosted by the activist group Brit Tzedek v'Shalom and will be hosted by Americans for Peace Now , both of which groups have been highly critical of Israel over the years.

He has recently called for aggressive American involvement in pushing for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians -- calling for the end of the incremental approach (which is "trust but verify" approach meant to test each side's honesty and ability to bring about peace). Abolishing it would be a foolish and potentially disastrous leap of faith into the unknown.

He has called for engagement with Iran.

The group for which he works, the United States Institute of Peace, was the key organizer of the Iraq Study Group that produced a report that has very troubling recommendations concerning Israel (James Baker, whose approach towards Israel Lasensky admires, was one of the two people who headed the Iraq Study Group).

Obama supporters might counter that Obama has a wide range of foreign advisers and seeks input from people with a variety of views. Most likely, Dennis Ross-with deep ties to the American Jewish community-will be headlined in this argument. However, it is unclear what role Ross has on the team. He is clearly angling to join what may be the next Administration in the White House. How likely is it that Ross, who served the Clintons (now Obama's opponents), will hold sway against the triumvirate of key Obama heavyweights: Lake, Brzezinski, and Susan Rice?

For Lasky's full piece follow this link:http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obama_and_israel.html

Comments

[Karen]

My head hurts now.