February 24, 2009
Occidental Observer

Richard Perle's Outrageous Lies

by Edmund Connelly

A premier architect and promoter of the neocon war against Iraq, "Prince of Darkness" Richard Perle, has been escalating his campaign to deny the neocon role in American politics. Let me explain.

Back in 1996, a group of Americans writing for an Israeli think tank published a paper for Israeli Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu called "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." In addition to calling for Saddam Hussein's replacement, it also advised an overthrow or destabilization of the governments of Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Iran, thus leading to something akin to a "Greater US-Israel Co-Prosperity Sphere."

One year later came the formation of The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon think tank based in Washington. William Kristol and Robert Kagan co-founded it as a non-profit educational organization, but many have accused it of playing a primary role in the Bush Administration's decision to go to war with Iraq in 2003. Later, the Pentagon hosted a unit called the Office of Special Plans (OSP), where Paul Wolfowitz joined Douglas Feith in propagating what many have claimed were false allegations about Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction.

In the American media there were legions of neocon writers who repeated the party line about the need for a preemptive war against Hussein. . . .

The schizophrenic aspect of naming or not naming neocons as Jews was obvious at the New York Times beginning at the end of 2008. . . .

Of course anyone following the antics of the neocons always knew about a certain Jewish character to the movement. After all, didn't Pat Buchanan famously write in his seminal cover story in The American Conservative in early 2003 that a "neoconservative clique" was responsible for a pre-planned attack on Iraq following 9/11? Continuing, he thundered, "We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars." . . .

Finally, I arrive at the point of this column: Despite the massive proof of neocon involvement in America's decision to go to war with Iraq and despite the overwhelming evidence that neoconservatism qualifies as a Jewish movement, central neocon figure Richard Perle has, with a straight face, stated that neocons do not exist. And it follows that if they don't exist, they certainly are not a Jewish cabal.

In a story last week in the Washington Post, journalist Dana Milbank expressed skepticism about Perle's odd claims. "Listening to neoconservative mastermind Richard Perle at the Nixon Center yesterday," he wrote, "there was a sense of falling down the rabbit hole. In real life, Perle was the ideological architect of the Iraq war and of the Bush doctrine of preemptive attack. . . .

Petras minces no words in this new book:

The lesson is clear: the rise of Judeo-fascism represents a clear and present danger to our democratic freedoms in the United States. They do not come with black shirts and stiff-arm salutes. The public face is a clean-shaven, neck-tied attorney, real estate philanthropist or Ivy League professor. But there is rising anger and hostility in American against the ZPC, against its arrogant authoritarian communal attacks on our democratic values, to say nothing of our national interests. Sooner or later there will be a major backlash - and it will reflect badly on those who, through vocation or conviction, engage in the firings, censoring and intimidation campaigns against the American majority. The American people will not remember their cries of 'anti-Semitism'; they will recall their role in sending thousands of American soldiers to their death in the Middle East in the interests of Israel, and how that war has diminished the United States' image in the world, to say nothing of its economic well-being and democratic freedoms at home.

How the American people react to these brazen attempts by the Jewish neocons to whitewash their role in steering America on such a disastrous course will show their maturity and determination to get to the truth of the matter, or it will show their lack thereof. The proper response, of course, is to forcefully reject these outrageous lies.

FULL TEXT

Tweet
Follow @wisdomfund

A. K. Ramakrishnan, "Mahatma Gandhi Rejected Zionism," The Wisdom Fund, August 15, 2001

Dovid Weiss, "Judaism: An Alternative to Zionism," Neturei Karta International, April 1, 2002

"Jewish Writers Claim Powerful Zionists Drove USA Into Mid-East War For Sake of Israel!," various, 2002 - 2003

Julian Borger, "The Spies Who Pushed for War," Guardian, July 17, 2003

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, "The Israel Lobby," London Review of Books, March 23, 2006

Katrina Vanden Heuvel, "The Enormous Cost of War," Nation, August 17, 2007

William Greider, "Paulson Bailout Plan a Historic Swindle," Nation, September 19, 2008

Thomas Frank, "Richard Perle's Apologia," wsj.com, February 25, 2009

[The message of the Israeli analysts was clear: the Middle East foreign policy of the US has become institutionalized; and rather than watching the US president, one has to watch the institutions that would make the policy. Given this message, my analysis of what the future has in store for Iran concentrated on a few neoconservative institutions and individuals. In particular, I predicted that if Obama were to be elected, the US policy on Iran would be made mostly by Dennis Ross, the "consultant" to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP or simply Washington Institute), a "think tank" affiliate of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). That prediction has now come true. On February 23, 2009, it became official that Dennis Ross is the "Special Advisor to the Secretary of State for the Gulf and Southwest Asia."--Sasan Fayazmanesh, "Dennis Ross and Iran: The Fox Guarding the Chicken Coop," counterpunch.org, February 27, 2009]

[In an account covering presidencies from Woodrow Wilson to George W. Bush, the author chronicles the influence wielded by pro-Israeli agents operating inside administrations over the past century regardless of party.--Edmund Connelly, " Jeff Gates' Guilt by Association," theoccidentalobserver.net, March 18, 2009]

[He only regretted imprecision - that he had blasted the lobby rather than doing more to emphasize the reflexive organizational American support for the policies of the right-wing Israeli government.--Philip Weiss, "Freeman's Fight: The Israel lobby gets its man - and tips its hand," American Conservative, March 23, 2009]

[But some see FPI as a likely successor to Kristol's and Kagan's previous organization, the now-defunct Project for the New American Century (PNAC), which they launched in 1997 and which became best known for leading the public campaign to oust former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein both before and after the Sept. 11 attacks.--Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe, "Neo-Con Ideologues Launch New Foreign Policy Group," Inter Press Service, March 26, 2009]

[Only one nation had the means, motive, opportunity and stable nation state intelligence required to take the US to war in the Middle East while also making it appear that Islam is the problem.--Jeff Gates, "Israel and 9/11," middle-east-online.com, September 11, 2009]

[So, the open secret of Israeli influence is studiously ignored, even as presidential candidates prostrate themselves before the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. . . .

Congress is no different. It has given Israel's controversial Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a record-tying three invitations to address joint sessions of Congress--Robert Parry, "Why Not a Probe of 'Israel-gate'?," consortiumnews.com, April 20, 2017]

[Millions are spent every year ferrying dozens upon dozens of members to Israel for eight-day junkets.--Murtaza Hussain, "MEET THE SECRET DONORS WHO FUND AIPAC'S ISRAEL TRIPS FOR CONGRESS," theintercept.com, November 18 2023]