Posted on 12/31/2003 3:05:52 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Discussing the Iraq war with the Washington Post last week, former General Anthony Zinni took the path chosen by so many anti-Semites: he blamed it on the Jews.
Neither President Bush nor Vice-President Cheney—nor for that matter Zinni’s old friend, Secretary of State Colin Powell—was to blame. It was the Jews. They “captured” both Bush and Cheney, and Powell was merely being a “good soldier.”
Technically, the former head of the Central Command in the Middle East didn’t say “Jews.” He instead used a term that has become a new favorite for anti-Semites: “neoconservatives.” As the name implies, “neoconservative” was originally meant to denote someone who is a newcomer to the right. In the 90’s, many people self-identified themselves as “neocons,” but today that term has become synonymous with “Jews.”
And if anybody should know better, it’s Gen. Zinni. It is well-known that those who are labeled “neocons” within the administration—whether the number-two official at the Pentagon, Paul Wolfowitz, or undersecretary of Defense Doug Feith—are almost always Jews.
Sadly typical is a Business Week article this May that identified Wolfowitz, Feith, Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle, former Reagan administration official Ken Adelman and Weekly Standard editor William Kristol—all Jews—as “neocons,” yet Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld—neither one Jewish—as simply “key allies.” Policy beliefs and worldviews were not different between these two groups; only religion distinguishes them.
Given that the “neocons” do not control the Departments of State or Defense nor the National Security Council—gentiles all head those agencies—and given that the White House is clearly run by non-Jews, how is it that Zinni claims that the “neocons” were responsible for the U.S. liberating Iraq? As he explains to the Post, “Somehow, the neocons captured the president. They captured the vice president.”
And the Post piece uses dramatic language when discussing Zinni’s views on the “neocons”:
“The more he listened to Wolfowitz and other administration officials talk about Iraq, the more Zinni became convinced that interventionist ‘neoconservative’ ideologues were plunging the nation into a war in a part of the world they didn’t understand.”
Zinni’s comments are eerily similar to those made by former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad at the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit this October. In a speech that drew a standing ovation from the leaders of Muslim nations in attendance, Mahathir remarked, “Today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.”
Since Jews make up roughly 2% of the American population and less than a fraction of one percent of the world’s—yet attract disproportionately more of the world’s bigoted venom—the only way to perpetuate the hatred of Jews that has existed for centuries is to blame them for controlling vital industries, “ruling the world by proxy,” or by “capturing” the leader of the free world and his likewise freely elected vice-president.
Let’s suppose for a moment that Zinni, who could not be reached for comment, had no idea that “neocon” has become code for “Jew.” At best, his statements were simply ludicrous. Both Cheney and Bush had full knowledge of the unabated evil of Saddam Hussein—the former even having helped lead the Gulf War as the Secretary of Defense—and neither needed to be “captured” by anyone to understand the need to rid the world of Saddam’s tyranny.
But now let’s suppose Zinni has at least minimal common sense and at least passively follows Washington politics. In that instance, Zinni’s comments are not much different than Mahathir’s—and just as inaccurate. As anyone with even a passing knowledge of the administration can tell you, the president and the vice-president were probably the two biggest advocates for liberating Iraq. Even at the staff level, the majority of the leading “hawks” were gentiles such as National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice and White House chief of staff Andrew Card.
It’s a shame that someone who so honorably served his nation for three decades would tarnish his legacy with such idiotic remarks. If he didn’t mean to use “neocon” as a code word for “Jew,” he should say so. But if he meant to, then he should just shut up.
Having served under the man and gotten to know him I can honestly say he doesn't have a political bone in his body
I was amazed he took the Palestine job. Effort was doomed to failure before it began
A politically astute person would have known that
Serving at the pleasure of the President I guess he felt there wasn't much choice
A more politically savvy person would have begged out
No, I believe the man is just telling the truth as he sees it
To answer your question, during the MacNamara days all I could shoot was a BB gun
Studied it a lot though (Vietnam). Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are actually worse for my money
The missed opportunities would make you weep
We're still winning though.
All the best
Qatar-6
He is publicly trashing the President during time of war. That either makes him a Democrat like Clark or he is shilling for Arab client states who he favors in the ME. Otherwise he would shut up.
Exactly whose army do you serve in ?
What are you blaming Jews for this time ? What percent of the NY voting population do you think they are ? Are you calling for more towers to come down in NY to punish them ?
Without them Saddam Hussein would still rule Iraq and Zinni's favorite client states would be that much closer to WMDs.
In spite of Clark, Zinni, Scowcroft, and Clinton
He's trashing Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and as a participant in both OEF and OIF I can tell you they deserve it
It must be nice to be so certain about everything
Out of curiousity, how much time have you spent in the Middle East?
Just wondering
Qatar-6
According to Zinni (and I must assume you agree with him since you are publicly defending Zinni at President Bush's expense on this issue) President Bush conned the American people into removing Saddam Hussein from power. It's the Democrat line. It's the Saudi line. Zinni had close ties with the Arab states and was content for Saddam Hussein to remain in power for the rest of his natural life (despite an attempt on President Bush Sr's life).
Out of curiousity, how much time have you spent in the Middle East?
sakantu hunak qalilan wkuntu fialquwat ajjawiyah alamrikiah wanta ?
Zinni has taken the offensive against Bush. He is angry that Bush took out Hussein. Zinni was resonsible for containing Hussein.
You don't understand. It is the liberals who use the term "neocon" as a pejorative codeword. To them, it means "conservative Jew".
And, since liberals are never racist...
Since my wife and I are stay-at-home types on New Years Eve, I had a few minutes to check into these. Maybe too few.
John Qunicy Adams, in the Monsters to Destroy speech, effectively endorses all previous US foreign policy. Maybe this was just being politic. However, if sincere, he was endorsing the Tripolian Wars, in which we combatted piracy by going after, with our military, the North African state sponsors of this criminality. Imagine if instead of enslaving a few Americans on ships at sea, the Islamic pirates had been landing at New York, killing hundreds of American civilians, and then gone on to Washington DC and killed dozens of our soldiers. And imagine that the motive was political, as in 2001, rather than, as in 1801, criminal. Do you really see Washington or John Quincy Adams hesitating to go after Arab nations who trained the pirates and, for example, posted up three story tall Death to America signs in downtown Teheran? Now, it is true that the Federalists wouldn't have tried to turn Islamic states into republics. But they would certainly have agreed with President Bush on the need for a war against terror and pursued it with extreme vigor. And I think they would have found President Bush's plan to occupy for a few years and then turn over power to locals about right.
Having said that, I've never been school trained. Your arabic is probably better than mine.
PSAB or Daharan?
Qatar-6
one other point
Instead I find all we did was trade cowardly dillitante amateurs for bellicose dillitante amateurs
Bush's amateurs are at least and at least confronting the regimes that intend to kill millions of us. I tend to appreciate that. I also appreciate your service to our country. Thank you and stay safe. You are entitled to your opinion. You've earned that right.
He was probably advised to by OSD
I tend to believe that with Bush it was an exceptionally easy sell
The real point is that OSD micro management and bungling has cost us yardage bigtime
The military will get it done over there, but if they'd listened to us we'd be a lot farther along.
Dillitante amateurs, I stand by that statement.
All the best
Qatar-6
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.