Are Neocons an Existential Threat?

Exclusive: Despite a record of unprecedented error, American neocons remain the dominant foreign policy force in Official Washington, demanding more “regime change” in the Middle East and a new Cold War that could heat up and end all life on the planet, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The neoconservatives arguably have damaged American national interests more than any group in modern history. They have done more harm than the marginal Communists pursued by Sen. Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, more than the Yippies of the 1960s, more than Richard Nixon’s Watergate burglars in the 1970s or the Iran-Contra conspirators in the 1980s.

The neocons have plunged the U.S. government into extraordinarily ill-considered wars wasting trillions of dollars, killing hundreds of thousands if not millions of people, and destabilizing large swaths of the planet including the Middle East, much of Africa and now Europe. Those costs include a swelling hatred against America and a deformed U.S. foreign policy elite that is no longer capable of formulating coherent strategies.

Jackson Diehl, deputy editorial page editor of the Washington Post.

Jackson Diehl, deputy editorial page editor of the Washington Post.

Yet, the neocons have remained immune from the consequences of their catastrophes. They still dominate Washington’s major think tanks as well as the op-ed pages of virtually all the leading newspapers, including The Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and New York Times. They hold down key positions in the State Department, and their “liberal interventionist” pals have the ear of President Barack Obama.

Clearly, the neocons are skilled operatives, knowing how to arrange a steady stream of funding for themselves, from military contractors donating to think tanks, from U.S. taxpayers footing the bill for organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, and from ideological billionaires set on aligning U.S. foreign policy with hard-line Israeli desires.

The neocons are adept at writing op-ed articles that twist any set of facts into support for their ideological cause; they supply just the right quote that fits into the news cycle’s latest narrative; and they host policy conferences that attract powerful politicians and fawning media coverage.

But are the neocons a force that can coexist with the American Republic? Have they become an existential threat not only to the constitutional structure crafted in 1787 but to continued life on the planet? Are they locked on a course of action that could lead to a nuclear holocaust?

Clearly, the neocons’ commitment to Israeli interests violates a key principle established by the nation’s early presidents who all warned against “foreign entangling alliances” as a fundamental threat to a citizens’ republic that would transform America into a warrior state that would inevitably sap the nation’s liberties.

That loss of liberty has surely happened. Not only is there now bipartisan support for a surveillance state that can spy on the personal lives of American citizens, but the U.S. government has wedded itself to the concept of “strategic communications,” a catch-phrase that merges psychological operations, propaganda and P.R. into a seamless approach toward managing public perceptions at home and abroad.

When information is systematically pushed through a filter designed to ensure consent, the core democratic concept of an informed electorate has been turned on its head: The people no longer oversee the government; the government manipulates the people.

Neocon Tactics

All this has been part of the neocon approach dating back to the 1980s when key operatives, such as Robert Kagan and Elliott Abrams, were part of inter-agency task forces designed to whip the American people into line behind the government’s aggressive war policies. Guided by seasoned CIA propagandists, such as Walter Raymond Jr., the neocons learned their lessons well.

But the neocons are no longer just threatening the existence of the Republic; they are now endangering the continuation of life itself. They have decided to launch a new Cold War against Russia that will push the world toward the brink of thermo-nuclear war.

Of course, the neocons will frame their doomsday strategy as all Vladimir Putin’s fault. They will insist that they are just standing up to “Russian aggression” and that anyone who doesn’t join them is a “stooge of Moscow” or “weak.” They will dictate the shape of the debate just as they have in countless other situations, such as guiding Americans to war in Iraq over non-existent WMD stockpiles.

The neocon pundits will write seemingly authoritative op-eds about devious Kremlin strategies which will glue black hats on the Russians and white hats on whomever is on the other side, whether the neo-Nazis in Ukraine or the Islamic State/Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria. Americans will be whipped up into a frenzy that will demand a direct clash with the “Russ-kies” or “regime change” in Moscow.

There will be little or no concern about the risks. With the neocons, there never is. The assumption is that if “Amur-ika” is tough, the other side will back down. Then, with U.S.-led economic sanctions from the outside and U.S.-funded NGOs stirring up trouble from the inside, “regime change” becomes the cure-all.

Everyone who’s important in Official Washington everyone on the talk shows and op-ed pages knows that these disruptive situations always play out just the way they’re diagramed inside the top think tanks. A hand-picked “democratic reformer” who’s traveled the think-tank circuit and gotten the seal of approval the likes of Iraq’s Ahmed Chalabi will easily be installed and then the target country will do whatever the neocons dictate. After all, that approach worked so well in Iraq. The neocons always know best.

Raising the Stakes

Yet, with Russia, the stakes are even higher than with Iraq. Yes, it’s easy to find fault with Vladimir Putin. I myself have a personal rule that men over 40 should keep their shirts on when out in public (unless maybe they’re actors in a Bond film or going for a swim at the beach).

But Putin at least is a rational player in global affairs. Indeed, he has tried to cooperate with President Obama on a variety of key issues, including convincing Syria to surrender its chemical weapons and getting Iran to make concessions in the nuclear deal two contributions to world peace that infuriated the neocons who favored bomb-bomb-bombing both Syria and Iran.

At a dinner party in Europe this summer, I was asked by a well-informed British woman what should be done with Putin. My answer was that Putin doesn’t frighten me; it’s the guy who comes after Putin who frightens me because despite the neocons’ confidence that their “regime change” plans for Moscow will install a malleable moderate, the more likely result would be a much harder-line Russian nationalist than Putin.

The idea of the nuclear codes being handed to someone determined to defend the honor of Mother Russia is what scares me. Then, the clumsily aggressive neocons in Washington would have their reckless counterpart in Moscow, with neither side having the wisdom of a John F. Kennedy or a Nikita Khrushchev as displayed during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.

Would American neocons or a Russian super-nationalist have the wisdom and courage to back down, to compromise, to make the concessions necessary to avoid plunging over the edge? Or would they assume that the other guy would blink first and that they would “win” the showdown?

I recall what William R. Polk, one of Kennedy’s mid-level aides during the Cuban Missile Crisis, wrote recently about what happens to the human mind under such stress.

“Since human beings make the decisions, we must be aware of decision makers’ vulnerabilities,” Polk wrote. “During the Cuban Missile Crisis, I was one of about 25 civilians fully engaged in the events. I was not at the center but in the second or third ‘echelon.’ So I did not feel the full strain, but by the Thursday of the Crisis, I was thoroughly exhausted. My judgment must have been impaired even though I was not aware of it.

“I do remember, however, a terrible episode fortunately lasting only a few minutes at which I thought to myself, ‘let’s just get it over with.’ When later I met with my Soviet counterparts, I got the impression, although they denied it, that my feelings were not unique. How the strain impacted on the inner group I can only guess.”

If someone as stable and serious as Bill Polk had such thoughts “let’s just get it over with” what might happen when American neocons or hyped-up Russian nationalists are inserted into the decision process? That is an existential question that I don’t want to even contemplate.

Endless Putin-Bashing

And, if you doubt that the neocons will engage in over-the-top Cold War-style Putin bashing, you should read the op-ed by The Washington Post’s neocon deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl on Monday, entitled “Putin shifts fronts: With a move into Syria, he continues his in-your-face maneuvers.”

Diehl delves into Putin’s psyche a process that is so much easier than doing real reporting and concludes that Putin’s decision to join the fight in Syria against the Islamic State and Al Qaeda is just another attempt to stick his finger in the eye of the righteous but clueless United States.

Diehl, of course, starts off with the neocon-approved narrative of the Ukraine crisis, ignoring the key role of neocon Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (Robert Kagan’s wife) in midwifing the Feb. 22, 2014 coup that overthrew democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych and installed an intensely anti-Russian regime on Russia’s border. Nuland even handpicked the new Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, telling U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt in a phone call several weeks before the coup that “Yats is the guy.”

The coup-makers then dispatched neo-Nazi militias (and Islamist militants) to wage a bloody “anti-terrorism operation” against ethnic Russian Ukrainians who resisted the “regime change.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Ukraine Merges Nazis and Islamists.”]

But all that complexity is neatly boiled down by American neocons and the mainstream U.S. media as “Russian aggression.” Regarding the Syrian civil war, some neocons have even joined with senior Israeli officials in claiming that a victory by Al Qaeda is preferable to the continuation of Assad’s secular regime. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Syria’s Nightmarish Narrative.”]

Yet, however the story goes, the biggest bad guy is Putin, always with sinister motives and evil intent. So, in explaining the situation in Ukraine and Syria, Diehl writes:

“Throughout the summer, Russia’s forces in eastern Ukraine kept up a daily drumbeat of attacks on the Ukrainian army, inflicting significant casualties while avoiding a response by Western governments. On Sept. 1, following a new cease-fire, the guns suddenly fell silent. Optimists speculated that Vladi­mir Putin was backing down.

“Then came the reports from Syria: Russian warplanes were overflying the rebel-held province of Idlib. Barracks were under construction at a new base. Ships were unloading new armored vehicles. Putin, it turns out, wasn’t retreating, but shifting fronts, and executing another of the in-your-face maneuvers that have repeatedly caught the Obama administration flat-footed.”

The rest of the op-ed is similarly didactic and one-sided: Putin is the villain and Obama is the rube. In Diehl’s world, only he and other neocons have what it takes to take on Putin and put Russia down.

Any alternative explanation for Russia’s action in Syria is brushed aside, such as Putin deciding that a victory by either Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front as favored by Israel or the even more bloodthirsty Islamic State is unacceptable and thus Assad’s regime must be stabilized to avert a major geopolitical catastrophe.

Typically, the neocons breeze past the frightening logic of what the collapse of Assad’s military would mean for the Middle East, Europe and the world. After all, once Israeli leaders decided to throw in their lot with Al Qaeda in Syria, the die was cast as far as the neocons were concerned.

But the notion that the neocons can micromanage the outcome in Syria, with “moderate” Al Qaeda taking Damascus rather than the more “radical” Islamic State, reflects the arrogant know-nothing-ism of these U.S. opinion leaders. More likely, Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front would coordinate with their former allies in the Islamic State and share in the Sunni revenge against Syria’s Christian, Alawite, Shiite and other minorities.

So, while the Islamic State would busy itself chopping off heads of “heretics,” Al Qaeda could use its new headquarters in Damascus to plot the next round of terror attacks against the West. And, as destabilizing as the current refugee flow into Europe has been, it would multiply astronomically as the survivors of the Islamic State/Al Qaeda bloodletting flee Syria.

With Europe in chaos and the neocons still insisting that the real enemy is Russia, the possible consequences would be frightening to contemplate. Yet, this is the course that the neocons have set for the world and nearly all the Republican candidates for president have signed on for the journey along with Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

In 2014, arch-neocon Robert Kagan, whom Secretary of State Clinton selected as one of her advisers while also promoting his wife, Victoria Nuland, told The New York Times that he could embrace a Clinton presidency: “If she pursues a policy which we think she will pursue it’s something that might have been called neocon, but clearly her supporters are not going to call it that; they are going to call it something else.” [For more, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Is Hillary Clinton a Neocon-Lite?” and “Obama’s True Foreign Policy ‘Weakness.’“]

So far, virtually no one in the 2016 presidential race or in the mainstream U.S. news media is seriously addressing the reality of the neocons’ “regime change” chaos spreading across the Middle East and the prospect of a destabilized Europe. What limited discussion there is on the campaign trail mostly echoes Jackson Diehl’s Putin-bashing.

No one dares confront the existential question of whether the United States and the world can continue to tolerate and accommodate the neoconservatives.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

image_pdfimage_print

63 comments for “Are Neocons an Existential Threat?

  1. InShort
    September 15, 2015 at 10:44 pm

    Isn’t this the continuation of the original plan: seven countries in seven years? We’ve trashed Iraq, trashed Afghanistan, trashed Libya, trashed Yemen, we’re working on Syria, not sure what we’ve done to Somalia, but it’s doubtless bad.

    As for the Neocons: As pointed out in this article, these people are traitors. And the penalties for treachery are pretty harsh. Since we can’t round them up for their stupidity, let’s go to 9/11 and look at exactly what they pulled out of the hat there. There is mounting evidence, traceable, documentable evidence that 9/11 was a Mossad operation, or more specifically a joint neocon (Israeli dual citizen) Mossad operation that resulted in the murder outright of 3000 US citizens, the death by inhalation sickness of more than twice that number (and continuing). The numbers we have murdered in Iraq and Afghanistan (and the Ukraine and Syria) on trumped up charges of terrorism probably reaches into the millions, not including the duped American soldiers who’ve gone to the Middle East believing they were fighting for something honorable when all they were fighting for was Israel’s plan to use America, its manpower and firepower, to wage aggressive wars to assert its own full spectrum dominance of the Middle East.

    Surely, there’s enough evidence to arrest every last one of these Neocon liars, murderers, thieves… When, pray tell, will someone have the guts to stand forward and put them away?

    • Bill Bodden
      September 15, 2015 at 10:58 pm

      Surely, there’s enough evidence to arrest every last one of these Neocon liars, murderers, thieves

      Except a version of victors justice prevails.

    • Roberto
      September 16, 2015 at 2:20 am

      They have been paying for it for centuries. These are the people who got the Second Temple destroyed.

      “Bad council confounds the adviser.”

    • Brad Owen
      September 16, 2015 at 8:26 am

      When, you ask, will the neocons be stopped? I’ll hazard a guess: When, or if, Mr. Corbyn’s Campaign to “take back” U.K. for the Commoners is thoroughly successful, and City-of-London is “check-mated”. Then Cecil Rhodes’ “Israel Project” (just one-of-MANY such projects hatched by the “Cecil Rhodes”-types, found in Queen Vicky’s Empire) to further expand The Empire’s Provinces, and undermine permanently, the existential threat-to-Empire that the U.S. Republic represents, will become untenable, as “The City”s second-stringers of Wall Street will NOT be able to carry the “Torch-of-Empire” without them, will not be able to carry on this false enmity with our natural ally-against-Empire; namely RUSSIA. Russia’s not stupid (unlike our foolish operatives-for-Empire). They KNOW we are at war with them. Like a well-played chess game, they are keeping us off-balance and frustrating plans to use ISIS-led Syria as a staging ground for attacks on Russia and China (Chechens and Uighers). For Queen Vicky’s Empire, Russia AND USA were “the big ones” that got away. This last chapter of Empire started with the FAILURE of Queen Vicky’s “Civil War Project” to destroy-and-re-absorb the territory of USA, as a Province of her Empire. She had Lincoln and Czar Nicholas II “whacked” for foiling The Plan. We’re in End-Game now, and the castle walls (The City and The Street) are under assault.

      • Brad Owen
        September 16, 2015 at 8:42 am

        Sorry. That should have been Czar AlexanderII.

      • Alan MacDonald
        September 19, 2015 at 11:31 am

        Very interesting assessment. Brad, but many (including myself) believe that the US has been more directly taken over by the Disguised Global Crony-Capitalist Empire and is the nominal HQ, and disguised as, our former country, with UK, many EU other former countries, Israel, and all the alphabet-soup of IMF, ECB, UN, NATO, et al and the TNC’s being the fast evolving cancerous core tumor of this first and last “truly global Empire”:

        “The U.S. state is a key point of condensation for pressures from dominant groups around the world to resolve problems of global capitalism and to secure the legitimacy of the system overall. In this regard, “U.S.” imperialism refers to the use by transnational elites of the U.S. state apparatus to continue to attempt to expand, defend, and stabilize the global capitalist system. We are witness less to a “U.S.” imperialism per se than to a global capitalist imperialism. We face an empire of global capital, headquartered, for evident historical reasons, in Washington.”

        Robinson, William I. (2014-07-31). Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity (p. 122). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.

    • September 17, 2015 at 3:54 pm

      It is quite possible there’s an element of US establishment that understands the plot to foment WWIII and is trying to thwart it. They know who the players are and what they’re up to. So it’s a dynamic process, a big chess game involving subterfuge, false flags, propaganda and espionage. Many world leaders understand it too, including Castro, Putin, and the Iranians. But it’s not the kind of thing they can speak of openly, because it just sounds crazy. Wise leaders know this; you can know of the plot, but you can’t speak of it—-except in veiled terms. Or privately, among trusted associates.

      Wise leaders are always the target of assassination plots, because they are inconvenient.

    • Orsis Rutherford
      September 18, 2015 at 4:58 pm

      Good comment. Also quite brave.
      There is increasing evidence that 911 was indeed a joint Mossad and Neocon (dual nationals) operation, with the CIA/FBI as a sweeper organization.
      The punishment for these crimes of high treason should be capital punishment. Unfortunately, the power these psychopaths still wield in the circles of power is too great and they will not be taken to justice. The only thing we can hope for is to inscribe their names in the Pantheon of Eternal Shame along with Caligula, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Sharon and Netanyahu.

      • Jeff Davis
        September 19, 2015 at 4:50 pm

        I don’t think it was a Mossad/Neocon plot or that the USG was involved. I think the Mossad’s job was and is keeping a close watch on all Arab/Muslim activity the world over, that they discovered the 911 plot, assessed that it would be profoundly favorable to Zionist interests, and then dispatched agents to monitor and “chaperone” the plot. That they knew of the plot and did not notify the US is unambiguously the act of an enemy state.

        I believe the “Israeli art students”, already proven to have been Israeli intelligence agents, were assigned to keep an eye on US law enforcement and counter-intelligence for any early signs that they were becoming aware of the plot. I don’t doubt that had clues leading to such an awareness begun to emerge, the Mossad would have acted to erase those clues and maintain a state of “unawareness”.

        That’s no small degree of involvement, shepherding the plot, and certainly rises to the level of the act of an enemy in sheep’s clothing.

        • Seamus Padraig
          September 22, 2015 at 1:15 pm

          Here’s another name you should be familiar with: Larry Silverstein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein). He was the contractor who originally built WTC 7 back in the 80s. Years later, in July 2001–a mere two months before the 9/11 attacks–he purchased the entire WTC complex from the NY Port Authority. Luckily for him, on the morning of the attacks, he “had an appointment” with his dermatologist, so he was spared a terrible fate. His untimely death would have a terrible loss for philanthropy, too: he was once NY Chairman for the United Jewish Appeal, one of America’s leading Zionist fundraising groups.

          I smell Mossad.

    • JWalters
      September 18, 2015 at 7:54 pm

      “Clearly, the neocons are skilled operatives, knowing how to arrange a steady stream of funding for themselves.”

      The neocons are hired hands of the war profiteers, whose wealth is enabling them to dominate the media and politics.
      http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com

      Their main talent is being devoid of any morality.

    • Mike Wilford
      September 19, 2015 at 4:01 pm

      When indeed Bill will these dual citizen, traitorous, murderous neocons be held accountable for all of their death and destruction. I’m not holding my breath, but it surely would be a glorious day for this country and the world. To me they are analogous to modern day Nazis. Thanks for your response to the article. More people need the facts you have presented about the truth of the neocons.

    • Lance Jobson
      September 20, 2015 at 1:29 pm

      Disastrous US foreign policy, led by New American Century neoconservatives allied with liberal interventionists are pushing the world to the brink of destruction. By spreading chaos in the Middle East, North Africa, the Balkans and throughout the euro zone, waves of war refugees are in forced migration and razor wire surrounded concentration camps. Meanwhile, in the US, waves of Latino asylum seekers are escaping from CIA regime change and drug dealer death squad wars on poor working people. This policy for a New World Order also includes a new Cold War against Russia!

      Meanwhile, rising tensions in the Far East between historical enemies Japan, China, Korea, Southeast Asia are on the rise. The US lacks only one lighted match to ignite the region—from US war games to violent conflict. Japan just passed, 09-19-2015, legislation allowing military use for other than defense, ending post-WW II laws banning military conflict resolution by wars of aggression.

      Couple the above with global economic contraction, China’s meltdown, EU sovereign debt defaults, austerity, widening wealth disparity across the globe, refugee crises, two billion living below the poverty line, nearly 50 million in US poverty and you have all the ingredients needed for World War III and use of nuclear weapons which will end civilization on earth.

      The history of globalization’s evolution from wars of nation-state conquest, national wars of liberation, anti-colonial conflicts and civil wars must be defined or viewed through the lens of World Wars I and II and by the Cold War. The World Wars are an outgrowth, led by the West and joined by emerging powers like Japan and China, in a struggle for economic and political world domination. It is foremost a struggle for material control of resources, including human resources. It is NOT some idealistic pursuit of freedom and liberty in the abstract promulgated by liberal protagonists for power projection. It is also not about spreading a so-called “free” marketplace. For example, former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger claims the driving force of power politics in the US and globally, is the pursuit of “freedom.” This idealistic view denies the use of military aggression and “regime change” for imperialist control of nations, raw materials and labor. Control of the world marketplace by force is a policy to insure US economic advantage, power and control—the fight for “freedom” in the globalist context, is the fight for Empire and Pax Americana. Rhetoric about “freedom” is just that: rhetoric and propaganda used to gain public acceptance of wars of aggression. Remember Iraqi WMD’s?

      The rise of international corporations, aka, multinationals, has superseded the nation-state as the most powerful actors globally. The nation-state governments and militaries are under the influence, like drunken armed militia of the most powerful multi-national corporate entities on the world stage, e.g., Big Oil, industrial giants, both public and private, as in the military-industrial complex. The so-called “freedom” fighters, Kissinger, Kagan, Kristol, Haas of the CFR, Hanlon talks about the need to “deconstruct” the Middle East—talk is about freedom based on profits controlled by the corporate elites. Rhetoric, propaganda and lies are used, for example, by corporate lackey, former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, when he said the war on Iraq “is not about the oil” and when the Big Lie replaces truth. Ironically, under US and UK control, Iraqi oil output has doubled since the wars outbreak in 2003, from under 2 mb/d, to over 4 mb/d. The resulting addition to the global oil glut has seen prices plummet on the world market. Meantime, the raging divide-and-conquer Iraqi civil war has replaced US boots on the ground. But, the financial burden to the US tax payer, is only slightly lessened as the government subsidy to oil extraction industries continues.

      Notice too, how the US political class relies on demons to whip-up hatred and fear in the public mind, all the better to pursue wars of aggression. What Bush-Cheney-Obama-Biden-Clinton sees as evil-doers, for example, there was bin-Laden, Saddam Hussein, Quadaffi and ongoing Kim Jong-Un of DPRK and Iran’s Supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, plus the latest-greatest evil, Vladimir Putin.

      The most powerful international class of capitalist gangsters, with headquarters in NYC, Washington DC, London, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, etc. must be brought to justice for war crimes and crimes against humanity. They must be put out of business-as-usual on a permanently—survival of mankind depends on stopping the real state-sponsors of terrorism, led by the US.

  2. Larry
    September 15, 2015 at 11:22 pm

    Hey, what did the Yippies ever do to you? What damage? Maybe they damaged their own brain cells, but who didn’t back then? Was it the pig they ran for president? Jeez, you’d think they blew up armored cars or something.

    • Bob Van Noy
      September 16, 2015 at 4:15 pm

      Thanks Larry: My response to Robert Parry….
      “They have done more harm than the marginal Communists pursued by Sen. Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, more than the Yippies of the 1960s, more than Richard Nixon’s Watergate burglars in the 1970s or the Iran-Contra conspirators in the 1980s.”

      For the first time I must disagree with you Robert Parry. For many years now I have often thought about those noxious sixties and 1968 specifically. I think now, that the Yippies were doing their very non violent best at pointing out the misdirection of US foreign policy. I was a veteran at the time and not too fond of The Yippies and SDS, but in retrospect I can see what they were trying to say. In fact, many have become heroic in my mind when I realize that people like Carl Oglesby who wrote the astonishing accurate account of the JFK assassination in “The Yankee and Cowboy War” in 1976 and the “real time” social research, of C. Wright Mills within Cuba, I realize that I was too quick to Judge real committed people. Actually it was the real genius of the Nixon administration that they were so able to drive a very effective wedge between the the blue collar workers and the peace movement that lasts to this day, but may, just now, be breaking down… So I would ask you to think more concisely about this grouping. Joe McCarthy and Watergate; for sure, but the yippies tried their best to halt the insanity. Kind of like what we are doing today…

      • sufferinsuccotash
        September 17, 2015 at 2:34 pm

        There’s a tendency to make serious category mistakes when discussing 60s-era activism. The Yippies (Abby Hoffman et al) weren’t even in the same league with the SDS. Lumping them together would be akin to equating Karl Marx to Harpo Marx. Maybe R. Parry is arguing that the antiwar movement’s activities in general triggered the “law and order” backlash that helped to put Nixon in the White House. It would be a pretty thin argument though. Street demonstrations were the only effective means available of putting the antiwar movement on the nation’s radar screen, at least up until 1968.

        • Bob Van Noy
          September 18, 2015 at 7:29 am

          I agree sufferin, I look at it as the intellectuals And the street theater artists both reacting in their own fashion to an illegal government. Now that I think of it, the Occupy movement combined both possibly to greater effect. You are so right about street demonstrations being the only effective means…

      • dahoit
        September 18, 2015 at 5:48 pm

        The Yippies all became yuppies and now they are Zionists.So much for political convictions.

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:19 pm

      Didn’t they try to levitate the Pentagon once?

  3. diogenes
    September 16, 2015 at 12:05 am

    The “bi-partisan foreign policy” in favor of global empire for the banksters of Wall Street depends on — and receives — the support not only of “neocons” but of “neoliberals”. “We came. We saw. He died. Cackle cackle cackle.” As Hillary says — Obama’s Sect. of State! The pretense that this horrific “foreign policy” is to be blamed on “neocons” is part of the problem. Get real.

    • Alex
      September 16, 2015 at 2:56 am

      Hillary is a neocon. But for the rarest of exceptions, most of the the american ‘left’ – including Sanders – are just a little more moderate right wingers.

    • Iowa Scribe
      September 17, 2015 at 12:09 am

      Neocons or neolibs, they’re all members of the War Party. I have long thought of them all as neocons regardless of which party they inhabit and corrupt. Most of the are Christian or Jewish Zionists. Remember this revealing little kerfluffel way back in February 1998: http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/18/town.meeting.folo/

    • September 17, 2015 at 4:03 pm

      @diogenes

      Neocons, Zio-cons, neoliberals, the war party, sooper power, snooper power, a rose by any other name.

      Americans are screwed by the treasonous traitors!

      The public are kept distracted by stupid neocon/ziocon diatribes about Iran and mesmerized by Donald Trump’s daily rants, planned theater, a crazy reality show to fill air time. Maybe it’s intended to terrify the voters straight into the arms of neocon Hillary Clinton deep in the pockets of Ziocons?

  4. Joe Tedesky
    September 16, 2015 at 12:34 am

    If you recall ‘the Project for a New American Century’ specifically states, how we must spread our values and democracy while we still hold the military high ground. So, between the various draft dodgers, and dual citizens, we accrued quite a colorful cast of characters who are hell bent on carrying out this mission. This colorful bunch are wearing America thin, with all their wars. Think about it, there is more serious talk in congress about reducing hard earned social benefits, rather than cutting our heavy burdened defense budget. Our corporate run media by not keeping American’s abreast of these important policies, is a huge part of this country’s problems. Citizens are more educated, as to know more about a Kardashian lip surgery procedure, as opposed to knowing anything about the Middle East. All is not lost. I personally get an uplifting feeling from reading many of the comments, where readers actually make better sense of things than our current leaders do. I guess this is enough to allow me to have some hope for a better future. Yes, I maybe kidding myself, but I still have faith in the American people. Correct that to my having faith in the world’s people. It would not surprise me, if Europe took a turn away from their American masters. If Russia does follow through by fighting terrorist in Syria, I hope they impress our U.S. military’s central command by making them think twice before squaring of with Russia. A stronger Russia possibly could change that PNAC policy to strike while our iron is still hot idea they thought up. Although there again, we a talking about the one dimensional Neocon’s, and they are always hard to figure out.

    • Bill Bodden
      September 16, 2015 at 12:56 pm

      … rather than cutting our heavy burdened defense budget.

      Make that “war” budget.

      • Joe Tedesky
        September 16, 2015 at 2:57 pm

        … rather than cutting our heavy burdened WAR budget

  5. rosemerry
    September 16, 2015 at 2:03 am

    PLEASE do not go on droning the 9/11 complaints. ONCE in history the USA has an event which is NOT the most important in history, reacts in a continuing violent way abroad and repressive way in the “homeland”, and you never stop going on about it.
    STOP the USA pretending it owns the globe. Think of negotiations, peace, other people and the environment and forget “9/11”.

    • Phil Dennany
      September 16, 2015 at 10:28 am

      Yes, by all means set aside the the 9-11 treason that in fact was the false flag that rolled in the fraudulently justified genocidal wars of terror and aggression and world conquest that are still expanding world wide.

    • Mike78
      September 17, 2015 at 1:51 am

      Rosmary plays the do not pay any attention to the man behind the green curtain card. As in ignore all the bad guys, neocons, of the past 30 years. Not unlike how pre Israel Zioterrorists became college professors in the USA.

  6. rosemerry
    September 16, 2015 at 2:08 am

    The neocons who now inhabit both Parties and all the MSM, as well as Canada, much of the UK, Europe and Australia have no regard for truth, commonsense, an understanding of other people’s point of view or the idea that anyone else has rights.
    Chris Hedges long ago suggested we need to seek evil IN OURSELVES, not assume it is only in our “enemy”. This would make a good starting point for all of us; the neocons need to for the sake of the whole planet, as the article makes clear.

  7. September 16, 2015 at 3:50 am

    I enjoyed the article and I’m even able to comment now after two early comments were not accepted (probable because of software flaws and not because of their critical content).

    The articles on Consortiumnews are not unaffected by the captivating propaganda of Western news organizations (brutal Assad regime), they often use carelessly and thoughtlessly the propagandists terminology (Syria’s “civil war” instead of invasion, aggression, terrorist insurgency), but show a genuine desire to break out of the ideological cage and present alternative storylines.

    Concerning the Middle East, I still miss the environmental and social dimension:

    Water grab by the South-eastern Anatolia Dam project and by Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights. Increased desertification of the Middle East and long lasting droughts. Overpopulation with no future for young men.

    Unrealistic expectations raised by media presentations of a clean and luxurious Western consumer paradise. A paradise which is clearly unachievable and even in the most affluent countries exists only for a tiny minority on top of the food chain.

    The neocon project is probably not substantially different from other organizations and pressure groups which were used throughout history by the ruling elites as “control rooms” or operation centers to coordinate policies and propaganda. One could also discuss if the neocons are indeed central coordinators or just one of an assortment of likeminded groups. There are surely interconnections with AIPAC. ALEC, US Chamber of Commerce, The Family (The Fellowship), Bilderberg, and various billionaire-funded NGO’s, foundations, think tanks.

    I would also like to have more infos about the inner working and the members of the neocon project. Elliott Abrams and Robert Kagan were mentioned, in the US administration I made out Ashton B. Carter, Susan Rice, Victoria Nuland, Samantha Powers. There are for sure many more and a list of names just to get started would be helpful.

    Is Hillary clinton a neocon? Was Bill Clinton a crypto-neocon? Are the neocons bipartisan?

    This would be worth writing a book about but a seasoned journalist like Robert Parry can maybe manage to compress the most essential information into a future article. Thank you in advance,

  8. Peter Loeb
    September 16, 2015 at 6:02 am

    FOR OPENERS…

    Why doesn’t Russia introduce a resolution in the UN Security Council
    prohibiting the US and any other nation from sending any weapons or
    “non-lethal weapons” to Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    The UN Security Council UNANIMOUSLY passed S/Res/2139(2014) on
    22 February 2014. While evidently disingenuosly agreeing to the
    resolution especially point # 14, the US came out for “regime
    change” by which Bashar Assad would voluntarily abdicate his
    position. It should be noted that “regime change” is against
    international law. The only way for nations to join a US-lead
    “coalition” is to do it in violation of international law.

    But then both the US and Israel consider themselves beyond
    any law. We have seen this is “coalitions” of the past.

    Robert Parry’s analysis of the role of domestic US special
    interest lobbies is to the point as is Professor Lawrence
    Davidson’s most recent analysis. These views should be read in tandem
    and confirm one another..

    —-Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:27 pm

      “Why doesn’t Russia introduce a resolution in the UN Security Council
      prohibiting the US and any other nation from sending any weapons or
      ‘non-lethal weapons’ to Israel and Saudi Arabia.”

      Why not? Because the US would just veto it. Our Euro-muppets, France and the UK, probably would too.

  9. F. G. Sanford
    September 16, 2015 at 8:12 am

    I note that each time a discussion of Neocon ideology is dragged out, so is 9/11. I am discouraged from commenting one way or the other, as each side responds with arguments based on something more like religious fervor and faith than cold, calculating evidenced-based reason. But by any unbiased definition of what occurred after 9/11, the 9/11 Commission was a “deposition”, not an investigation. The disdain for any attempt to rectify that mischaracterization represents – plain and simple – intellectual cowardice. If the shoe fits, at least have the honesty to wear it. Some say, “solving 9/11 stops the war”. There may be some truth in that. But the lack of incentive to stop an essentially “elective” war speaks volumes regarding the incentive to embrace intellectual courage.

    • Joe Tedesky
      September 16, 2015 at 4:38 pm

      F.G. please go shake it off, because we need your rational mine here, plus many of us enjoy reading your comments. I know what your saying about the 9/11 stuff. The other night on the Smithsonian channel they ran a special regarding how the WTC towers fell the way they did. At first I was excited, and relieved, thinking we would fine out something that might explain the collapse of those buildings. The show centered around these two chemist, and that seemed interesting. So, these chemist guys went on to explain how with all of the aluminum that the planes were made from melted and mixed with other debris which made the steel columns collapse as they did. I waited all the way until they ran the shows credits, and yes there was no mention of Building #7. Whoops! You are so right that many people talk about 9/11 in a political context, and not from an investigative one. Why is this a partisan position?That is too bad, because with that type of mine set nothing will ever get accomplished towards solving any of the mysteries that swirl around the 9/11 tragedy. Colombo, and Charlie Chan would have a hard time solving this crime, between what we are allowed to know and say about it. Then again, (& you & I have talked about this before) ….how did that pristine bullet end up on that hospital gurney?

    • F. G. Sanford
      September 16, 2015 at 6:15 pm

      Joe, there’s nothing to shake off. Faith is believing without proof. When confronted with evidence, they simply raise the threshold for proof. Here’s an example of “junk science” that sounds convincing. Stanton Friedman, the UFO guru, argues that travel from Zeta Reticuli for the purpose of “alien abduction” is perfectly plausible, because the speeds needed to accomplish the journey in a reasonable time are easy to achieve. He wows his audiences with mathematical calculations that are “true”, but misleading. Lecturing to undergraduate physics majors, he asks, “If a Corvette can accelerate from zero to sixty in six seconds, how long would it take to reach the speed of light?” They are blown away when he reveals that it would only take four days. What he leaves out is that, because E = mv, the Corvette after the second day would effectively weigh millions of tons and require billions of gallons of gasoline to continue accelerating. In a similar vein, thermate is made of aluminum, Iron and sulfur. An aluminum airplane hitting a steel building filled with terrestrial biological entities (humans) provides those ingredients. What’s left out is the surface area required in the form of micro-particles and the “Delta T” required to initiate the reaction. It would be like believing that Grandpa could explode because he wears a nitroglycerine patch. But it’s pointless to argue, because UFO fans “know what they saw”. So, the safe thing is to just stay out of it.

      • Joe Tedesky
        September 16, 2015 at 10:11 pm

        Glad you are okay. I once had a 65 Pontiac Bonneville. The faster the speedometer went up the faster the gas gage went down. Traveling the speed of light would have sucked up all the oil in the Gulf of Mexico. Writing this, is what I do while watching the Republican debates…I think they have put something in our food! Once again I am glad you are doing well.

  10. onno
    September 16, 2015 at 9:34 am

    Besides this excellent analysis by Robert Parry I enjoy the comments from the different contributors. It shows that many Americans are worried about the state of their Nation. It also shows that the majority of Americans remain being brainwashed by MSM propaganda.

    Another reason to look anxiously ahead for the presidential election in 2016 and whether the more informed Americans’ candidate will win or whether it will be business as usual and a political candidate from the establishment will again and further destroy their own nation.

    I think it’s a disgrace to see this great nation being controlled by neocons, warmongers and incompetent politicians following their own interests and ambitions. Like president Abraham Lincoln said: America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves’ Like VP Biden protecting is son Hunter working for a war criminal/oligarch Kolomoisky’s Burisma Holdings and his private army under Yarosh murdering civilians in East Ukraine to expand his gas/oil fields in Donbass. And that all with full knowledge of ‘DADDY’ and VP USA Biden who will be running for the next president of the USA although he has blood on his hands.

    Apparently, that is what has happened in the past 70 years by Washington concentrating on its ill conceived foreign policies of ruling the world instead of allocating its rich resources on domestic problems like we see today on the streets of America. It looks like that US presidents are only elected by the rich but especially by the defence industry that needs wars to keep its profits up. Dead civilians and children, millions of refugees happen to be ‘ONLY’ collateral damages.

  11. jsamos
    September 16, 2015 at 9:35 am

    Short answer to why the neocons continue to press their advantage: they are violent bullies, and no one has the fortitude to face them down.

    • Intellectually conservative
      September 16, 2015 at 11:24 am

      Your point is well taken, but incomplete. The conservatives, the so-called neo-cons, they do not abide by any standards or play by the rules. Anyone to the left of them is always a few steps behind and playing straight-man. You can see it everyday in your own life: anybody who does not behave according to the minimum of standards and rules is unencumbered by them, whereas those who do make the effort to be more honest and consistent in their analysis and conduct will always be frustrated, left flailing like some boob who has been cheated, ripped off, gypped and bamboozled again.

      • Dick Chicanery
        September 16, 2015 at 11:33 am

        Recall the prologue to the illegal, international war crime invasion of Iraq in 2003? Or the presidential campaign in 2004? Anyone suggesting any other course than invasion and war was accused of “hating the troops”, “hating america”, “being soft on crime and terrorism”, being weak and mollycoddling the enemy, hating children, et bloody cetera. While one wastes their time attempting to rebut the un-answerable, the conservatives have run off with all the money. If you consider the results of the past few non-presidential elections, perhaps americans might consider it worthwhile to vote.

  12. September 16, 2015 at 9:41 am

    “virtually no one in the 2016 presidential race or in the mainstream U.S. news media is seriously addressing the reality of the neocons’ “regime change” chaos spreading across the Middle East and the prospect of a destabilized Europe.”

    Why not acknowledge the one candidate, Lincoln Chafee, who is?

  13. Joe L.
    September 16, 2015 at 10:49 am

    Definitely all of the warmongers from around the world and particularly the US (and its’ proxies) are a threat to the world. Could you imagine a world where the large powers actually got along with each other even if they don’t totally agree on everything. A world where all nations respect international law and the general assembly makes the decisions of the world rather then a security council. A world where instead of investing in more and more war the major powers use their technology and economic clout to work together to solve the world’s problems. Work together and create clean energy, eradicate disease and poverty, and just work together rather then act like children believing that someone is better then someone else. Greed is not good and greed is really the driving force behind these wars.

  14. Tom Welsh
    September 16, 2015 at 11:53 am

    Simply ask, “cui bono?” When did anyone see a poor neocon? Somehow, they have worked out a near-perfect system of parasitism whereby they enrich themselves and also enjoy the sensuous pleasure of ordering other people around and killing them if they resist – or don’t move fast enough.

    Incidentally, I don’t like Mr Parry’s aspersions about Putin. First he says that it’s easy to find fault with him, then he makes that weak remark about men over 40 keeping their shirts on. That really is a complete non sequitur: and furthermore, my version of that rule would be that men who are out of shape – at whatever age – should keep their shirts on. Putin is quite presentable shirtless, and I wish him well for showing the world that over-60s can be fit and quite good looking.

    As far as I have been able to find out, Putin is a saint compared with almost any Western politician. He seems to have genuine respect for law – all law – and we have it on the word of no less a personage than Bill Clinton that Putin is truthful and never breaks his word. So why not say “it’s easy to find fault with Obama” – or Cameron, or Merkel, or Hollande? Which it really is.

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:44 pm

      I would strongly agree with you. Not only is Putin a front-rank statesman on foreign policy, but he’s also done great things for Russia domestically. Do they really expect us to believe that the only reason he has an 87% domestic approval rating is because ‘RT is the only news channel in Russia’?

      But even in many corners of the alt-left, a lot of writers do feel this strange compulsion to stick to a plague-on-both-our-houses narrative, presumably so as to sound more ‘fair and balanced’ and therefore more credible.

  15. Bill Bodden
    September 16, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    There is to be considered the pro-capitalist concept that everything that is part of their domain must grow or die. Cities must grow. Corporations must grow. Portfolios must grow. The Empire must grow. Too much is never enough is an obscenity that escapes the dominant members and would-be members of our current version of capitalism. That this concept preceded the decline and fall of nations and empires doesn’t seem to faze them.

    • Carroll Price
      September 19, 2015 at 9:51 am

      The answer is simple. Economies like the US that’s founded solely on a Ponzi scheme where the principle, is created, but NOT THE INTEREST OWNED ON THE PRINCIPLE, cannot survive unless the economy expands at a rate sufficient to generate a need for newly printed money to replace that used to repay principle PLUS interest on old money. In other words, like any Ponzi scheme, new money entering the system (due to expansion) is used to pay interest charges on old money, while keeping the scheme afloat.

  16. Mike78
    September 16, 2015 at 2:00 pm

    Umm this is toughie. The neocons haven’t been making errors they’ve been fulfilling their agendas. The MSM and the Neocons are Zionist based and have the same agendas. Without the support of the MSM the Neocons would never ascended to the driver’s seat of US policies.
    I’m exhausted.

    • dahoit
      September 18, 2015 at 6:01 pm

      I agree completely;It’s so simple ,the answer;They control the discourse,the politicians,education and our whole information system outside the net.
      Poisonous vipers.

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:46 pm

      Exactly. The neocons haven’t failed; they’re just not finished yet.

  17. Jsamos
    September 16, 2015 at 2:18 pm

    Unspoken is that we in the west all benefit from the vice and violence of this empire. Do you want to pay the healthcare for Chinese workers who make your technology or for Guatemalan coffee pickers? As the saying goes: “they might be violent criminals, but they’re our violent criminals.”

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:52 pm

      Stop blaming the people for the decisions of the oligarchy. After all, how many Americans do you know that were really in favor of shipping all our factories to China? The oligarchy doesn’t push “free” trade because it’s good for the working class. They push it because it means cheaper labor and is good for the bottom line. Not unlike the Chinese and the Guatemalans, we too are victims of the system.

  18. Andoheb
    September 16, 2015 at 4:23 pm

    I suspect nothing short of a US military defeat or a very costly victory in a war of choice will derail the neo cons once and for all With China reported to be developing missiles that can take out aircraft carriers, this may not be as far fetched as it sounds.

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:54 pm

      One, final dollar-crash might do the the trick as well. I’m hoping we can escape this system without a nuclear-exchange.

  19. Bruce
    September 16, 2015 at 9:17 pm

    Yes, via Terminal PNAC ATTACKS!

  20. Grandma Barb
    September 19, 2015 at 10:52 am

    “They have done more harm than the marginal Communists pursued by Sen. Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, more than the Yippies of the 1960s, more than Richard Nixon’s Watergate burglars in the 1970s or the Iran-Contra conspirators in the 1980s.”

    The only one that might even compare is the Iran-Contra affair. How the rest of these even come close to what the neo-cons have done is beyond me. What stupid, inane, completely mind boggling comparisons. Were you having problems finding something to compare to the atrocities these idiots, headed by Cheney, have perpetrated? The balance of the article seems to be fairly cognizant.

  21. Boris M Garsky
    September 19, 2015 at 11:33 am

    I agree with the author, the yippies brought drugs into the mainstream of our society and yes, these yippies are the neocons of today. However, that is not why I comment. I had a conversation with a close friend of mine regarding todays miasmic world. Our Government is under siege by the neocons. Their goal is an American-Russian confrontation and conflagration. Historically, it is their hatred of Christians and Russia, especially, that fuels this drive to overthrow and destroy Russia totally. Germany is under their thumb, but still breathes. This is a problem and therefore they pit Germany against Russia and America against Russia; divide, conquer and control. The mass migration of Africans to Europe is hardly something that can come about spontaneously, and therefore was planned and arranged ( needless to say that much money has been made by the smugglers as had the Jewish Slavers). Why? to foster confusion, and disunity followed by whole scale terrorism throughout Europe and America; also placing tens of thousands of terrorists on East Ukraine and Russia borders. In 2016, our ill informed president plans on accepting tens of thousands of these migrants, at the behest of the neocons. Needless to say, many will be well trained and seasoned terrorists. They will not be fully vetted as the government acknowledges that the vetting process is far incomplete. These terrorists will be augmented by the agents already within. Putin is no fool and he acts accordingly. The Europeans are finally grasping the magnitude of their stupidity and are now closing their borders, albeit, too late. I predict a major terrorist act within the American borders in 2016. The neocons will blame the attack(s) on Iran for two reasons: to catapult Sanders into the WH, and to nullify the Iran agreement. With a neocon at the helm, in control of our nuclear arsenal, we become grist for the war mill. Further, Martial Law may be declared to control any civil backlash. Remember the brutality of the Bolsheviks. If we surrender the Pentagon to the neocons, we, as a sovereign nation are dead and it appears that that is what the president is doing.

    • Seamus Padraig
      September 22, 2015 at 1:59 pm

      Interesting. Do you think Bernie Sanders is really one of them? I mean, I know he’s not great on foreign policy. But is he really worse than the others? Wouldn’t the neocons rather have Hillary or a Republican in the WH? Just askin’.

  22. bluto
    September 19, 2015 at 5:51 pm

    Note: This talk and the series preceeding it were the result of a successful academic freedom challenge at SFCC:
    ———————–

    ‘The Successful 2nd American Revolution 4-2-2015*, 1P1V1S, and America free of the Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby’

    WHEN: June 25th, Thursday evening, 5:00 – 6:00pm
    WHERE: Santa Fe Community College, Room 205
    WHO: Dr Lance Dale ..

    Description of the historic clean break with the Israeli Lobby made *4-2-2015 with the signing of the Iran Framework Nuclear Deal (and finalized June 30 with the Iran Nuclear Deal), the collapse of Israeli Apartheid and 1P1V1S, and America politically free of the Israeli Lobby

    The US Strategic Pivots of the 2nd American Revolution:

    The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Iran *4-2-15
    The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Palestine

    Dissolution of Israeli Apartheid
    1P1V1S – One Person, One Vote, One State from the River to the Sea

    The 3 causative ‘existential events’ of the Apartheid’s collapse:
    The 3 dispositive and concurrent existential events seen as such by Israel itself:

    Fresh History #1: The Iran Nuclear Deal: signed sealed and delivered June 30
    Fresh History #2: Successfully advancing Palestinian case at the ICC
    Fresh History #3: Catastrophic reversal of US Diplomatic cover at UN

    – ‘Concurrency and synergy of crises and Strategic Collapse of Israeli Apartheid/Strategic Collapse of the Israeli Lobby’

    American Political Consequences and Resets :

    ‘America politically free of the Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby’
    Battle Royale – Obama’s Legacy slam-dunking Hillary’s Near-Presidency
    Sheldon Adelson’s ‘Chinese Mafia links’ US Court Case
    ‘There is no Israel Lobby of Post-Apartheid 1P1V1S’
    CHECKMATE: ‘Hillary’s Legacy: Queen Hillary on an AIPAC Horse’

    ==========
    Goals: General familiarity with current US and Israeli policy position and state of play amidst rapidly evolving events and importance of Israeli media to understanding above

  23. September 21, 2015 at 12:18 am

    When will people realize that the Neo-Cons are simply the political descendants of the NAZIs that moved to the USA after WW2 in Operation Paperclip?

  24. Bren
    September 29, 2015 at 7:55 am

    The facts and observations that Mr. Perry provides are excellent, and within a certain scope, his analysis is penetrating, but I believe if he would widen his scope, he could offer an analysis that would make sense of the neocons’ behavior. I believe that the ultimate goal of the monied interests that the neocons represent, the global banksters, is global domination and a one world government new world order. Their strategy is to create so much chaos, mayhem, and strife in the world that people living in fear and desperation cry out for stability and security. They are out to create problems, not solve them, and by god they are good at their jobs!

    It should be no surprise to anyone that all the major media, including the Washington Post, are channels of propaganda, who in unison spin the same lies repeatedly about everything. You can go to wikipedia and read about the Frank Church Senate hearings on the CIA in the 70s and Operation Mockingbird, the CIA propaganda campaign that controlled the media. I can only imagine how a similar program today is in operation that is even more refined and effective.

Comments are closed.