“An Obama nomination and Senate confirmation of Chuck Hagel would be a major step in breaking the grip of Israel’s myrmidons (Israel-Firsters) in this country,” James M. Wall, journalist and former publisher of Chicago-based The Christian Century magazine.
Earlier, I had posted Jews against Chuck Hagel. Since then the Jewish Lobby smearing campaign against Barack Obama’s suspected nomination of former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel for the next head of Pentagon is being heated up. However, there are some sane voices trying to defend Hagel’s appointment as Secretary of Defence – being good for the interests of the United States in the long run.
I have come across several articles on internet – three of which could be of interest to the readers of this blog. Alan Hart’s Obama’s Hagel test from Britain, Robert Parry’s Hagel: The Neocon’s Last Stand? from the US and Ludwig Watzal’s Chuck Hagel: the best for the Petagon.
Alan Hart, a veteran British journalist and author, summed-up his article by saying: “Obama’s decision, expected very soon, about whether or not to nominate Hagel will give us the first significant indication since his re-election of whether or not he is going to continue to dance to Zionism’s tune or, as Hagel might put it, continue to be intimidated by its lobby“.
Robert Parry, wrote: “The neocons are after Hagel’s scalp because he has, at times, refused to sign on to hawkish neocon positions circulated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC, such as piling on more anti-Iran sanctions and demanding that Europe designate Hezbollah, Israel’s chief foe in Lebanon, as a terrorist organization“.
Ludwig Watzal concluded his article by saying: “The US should engage in direct talk with Iran on the nuclear issue without the European cacophony and Israel’s detrimental influence. Iran has to be treated on an equal footing. And Obama should put the Israeli Prime Minister in its place. He cannot accept any longer to be pushed around by a leader of a tiny little country. Hopefully, Obama and his new team will open a more realistic chapter on US Middle Eastern policy“.
On a personal note: I think Hagel’s nomination could be Obama’s PR stunt to fool Americans that he is more loyal to United States than Israel. Like in case of Chase Freedman, Obama is doomed to fall on Lobby’s knees – unless Obama and Hagel manage to convince the Lobby that they’re quite willing to share bed with Netanyahu regardless what Hagel may have said in the past about not going for a military attack against the Islamic Republic. Furthermore, Hagel may change his stand on Iran once appointed – as Dick Cheney did after becoming country’s vice-president. In 1995, Cheney asked for more trade relations with Iran and Libya. However, after becoming vice-president, Cheney even linked al-Qaeda and 9/11 to the Islamic Republic.
Israel: ‘Thou shalt not vote for Hagel’ | Rehmat's World
Earlier, I had posted Jews against Chuck Hagel. Since then the Jewish Lobby smearing campaign against Barack Obama’s suspected nomination of former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel for the next head of Pentagon is being heated up. However, there are some sane voices trying to defend Hagel’s appointment as Secretary of Defence – being good for the interests of the United States in the long run.
I have come across several articles on internet – three of which could be of interest to the readers of this blog. Alan Hart’s Obama’s Hagel test from Britain, Robert Parry’s Hagel: The Neocon’s Last Stand? from the US and Ludwig Watzal’s Chuck Hagel: the best for the Petagon.
Alan Hart, a veteran British journalist and author, summed-up his article by saying: “Obama’s decision, expected very soon, about whether or not to nominate Hagel will give us the first significant indication since his re-election of whether or not he is going to continue to dance to Zionism’s tune or, as Hagel might put it, continue to be intimidated by its lobby“.
Robert Parry, wrote: “The neocons are after Hagel’s scalp because he has, at times, refused to sign on to hawkish neocon positions circulated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC, such as piling on more anti-Iran sanctions and demanding that Europe designate Hezbollah, Israel’s chief foe in Lebanon, as a terrorist organization“.
Ludwig Watzal concluded his article by saying: “The US should engage in direct talk with Iran on the nuclear issue without the European cacophony and Israel’s detrimental influence. Iran has to be treated on an equal footing. And Obama should put the Israeli Prime Minister in its place. He cannot accept any longer to be pushed around by a leader of a tiny little country. Hopefully, Obama and his new team will open a more realistic chapter on US Middle Eastern policy“.
On a personal note: I think Hagel’s nomination could be Obama’s PR stunt to fool Americans that he is more loyal to United States than Israel. Like in case of Chase Freedman, Obama is doomed to fall on Lobby’s knees – unless Obama and Hagel manage to convince the Lobby that they’re quite willing to share bed with Netanyahu regardless what Hagel may have said in the past about not going for a military attack against the Islamic Republic. Furthermore, Hagel may change his stand on Iran once appointed – as Dick Cheney did after becoming country’s vice-president. In 1995, Cheney asked for more trade relations with Iran and Libya. However, after becoming vice-president, Cheney even linked al-Qaeda and 9/11 to the Islamic Republic.
Israel: ‘Thou shalt not vote for Hagel’ | Rehmat's World