A Short History: The Neocon "Clean Break" Grand Design & The "Regime Change" Disasters It Has Fostered

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Dan Sanchez via AntiWar.com,

To understand today’s crises in Iraq, Syria, Iran, and elsewhere, one must grasp their shared Lebanese connection. This assertion may seem odd. After all, what is the big deal about Lebanon? That little country hasn’t had top headlines since Israel deigned to bomb and invade it in 2006. Yet, to a large extent, the roots of the bloody tangle now enmeshing the Middle East lie in Lebanon: or to be more precise, in the Lebanon policy of Israel.

Rewind to the era before the War on Terror. In 1995, Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s “dovish” Prime Minister, was assassinated by a right-wing zealot. This precipitated an early election in which Rabin’s Labor Party was defeated by the ultra-hawkish Likud, lifting hardliner Benjamin Netanyahu to his first Premiership in 1996.

That year, an elite study group produced a policy document for the incipient administration titled, “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” The membership of the Clean Break study group is highly significant, as it included American neoconservatives who would later hold high offices in the Bush Administration and play driving roles in its Middle East policy.

“A Clean Break” advised that the new Likud administration adopt a “shake it off” attitude toward the policy of the old Labor administration which, as the authors claimed, assumed national “exhaustion” and allowed national “retreat.” This was the “clean break” from the past that “A Clean Break” envisioned. Regarding Israel’s international policy, this meant:

“…a clean break from the slogan, ‘comprehensive peace’ to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.”

Pursuit of comprehensive peace with all of Israel’s neighbors was to be abandoned for selective peace with some neighbors (namely Jordan and Turkey) and implacable antagonism toward others (namely Iraq, Syria, and Iran). The weight of its strategic allies would tip the balance of power in favor of Israel, which could then use that leverage to topple the regimes of its strategic adversaries by using covertly managed “proxy forces” and “the principle of preemption.” Through such a “redrawing of the map of the Middle East,” Israel will “shape the regional environment,” and thus, “Israel will not only contain its foes; it will transcend them.”

“A Clean Break” was to Israel (and ultimately to the US) what Otto von Bismarck’s “Blood and Iron” speech was to Germany. As he set the German Empire on a warpath that would ultimately set Europe ablaze, Bismarck said:

“Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided?—?that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849?—?but by iron and blood.”

Before setting Israel and the US on a warpath that would ultimately set the Middle East ablaze, the Clean Break authors were basically saying: Not through peace accords will the great questions of the day be decided?—?that was the great mistake of 1978 (at Camp David) and 1993 (at Oslo)?—?but by “divide and conquer” and regime change. By wars both aggressive (“preemptive”) and “dirty” (covert and proxy).

“A Clean Break” slated Saddam Hussein’s Iraq as first up for regime change. This is highly significant, especially since several members of the Clean Break study group played decisive roles in steering and deceiving the United States into invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam seven years later.


The Clean Break study group’s leader, Richard Perle, led the call for Iraqi regime change beginning in the 90s from his perch at the Project for a New American Century and other neocon think tanks. And while serving as chairman of a high level Pentagon advisory committee, Perle helped coordinate the neoconservative takeover of foreign policy in the Bush administration and the final push for war in Iraq.


Another Clean Breaker, Douglas Feith, was a Perle protege and a key player in that neocon coup. After 9/11, as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Feith created two secret Pentagon offices tasked with cherry-picking, distorting, and repackaging CIA and Pentagon intelligence to help make the case for war.

Feith’s “Office of Special Plans” manipulated intelligence to promote the falsehood that Saddam had a secret weapons of mass destruction program that posed an imminent chemical, biological, and even nuclear threat. This lie was the main justification used by the Bush administration for the Iraq War.

Feith’s “Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group” trawled through the CIA’s intelligence trash to stitch together far-fetched conspiracy theories linking Saddam Hussein’s Iraq with Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda, among other bizarre pairings. Perle put the Group into contact with Ahmed Chalabi, a dodgy anti-Saddam Iraqi exile who would spin even more yarn of this sort.


Much of the Group’s grunt work was performed by David Wurmser, another Perle protege and the primary author of “A Clean Break.” Wurmser would go on to serve as an advisor to two key Iraq War proponents in the Bush administration: John Bolton at the State Department and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The foregone conclusions generated by these Clean Breaker-led projects faced angry but ineffectual resistance from the Intelligence Community, and are now widely considered scandalously discredited. But they succeeded in helping, perhaps decisively, to overcome both bureaucratic and public resistance to the march to war.

On the second night of war against Iraq, bombs fall on government buildings located in the heart of Baghdad along the Tigris River.  Multiple bombs left several buildings in flames and others completely destroyed.

The Iraq War that followed put the Clean Break into action by grafting it onto America. The War accomplished the Clean Break objective of regime change in Iraq, thus beginning the “redrawing of the map of the Middle East.” And the attendant “Bush Doctrine” of preemptive war accomplished the Clean Break objective of “reestablishing the principle of preemption”

But why did the Netanyahu/Bush Clean Breakers want to regime change Iraq in the first place? While reference is often made to “A Clean Break” as a prologue to the Iraq War, it is often forgotten that the document proposed regime change in Iraq primarily as a “means” of “weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria.” Overthrowing Saddam in Iraq was merely a stepping stone to “foiling” and ultimately overthrowing Bashar al-Assad in neighboring Syria. As Pat Buchanan put it:

“In the Perle-Feith-Wurmser strategy, Israel’s enemy remains Syria, but the road to Damascus runs through Baghdad.”

Exactly how this was to work is baffling. As the document admitted, although both were Baathist regimes, Assad and Saddam were far more enemies than allies. “A Clean Break” floated a convoluted pipe dream involving a restored Hashemite monarchy in Iraq (the same US-backed, pro-Israel dynasty that rules Jordan) using its sway over an Iraqi cleric to turn his co-religionists in Syria against Assad. Instead, the neocons ended up settling for a different pipe(line) dream, sold to them by that con-man Chalabi, involving a pro-Israel, Chalabi-dominated Iraq building a pipeline from Mosul to Haifa. One only wonders why he didn’t sweeten the deal by including the Brooklyn Bridge in the sale.

As incoherent as it may have been, getting at Syria through Iraq is what the neocons wanted. And this is also highly significant for us today, because the US has now fully embraced the objective of regime change in Syria, even with Barack Obama inhabiting the White House instead of George W. Bush.

Washington is pursuing that objective by partnering with Turkey, Jordan, and the Gulf States in supporting the anti-Assad insurgency in Syria’s bloody civil war, and thereby majorly abetting the bin Ladenites (Syrian Al Qaeda and ISIS) leading that insurgency. Obama has virtually become an honorary Clean Breaker by pursuing a Clean Break objective (“rolling back Syria”) using Clean Break strategy (“balance of power” alliances with select Muslim states) and Clean Break tactics (a covert and proxy “dirty war”). Of course the neocons are the loudest voices calling for the continuance and escalation of this policy. And Israel is even directly involving itself by providing medical assistance to Syrian insurgents, including Al Qaeda fighters.

Another target identified by “A Clean Break” was Iran. This is highly significant, since while the neocons were still riding high in the Bush administration’s saddle, they came within an inch of launching a US war on Iran over yet another manufactured and phony WMD crisis. While the Obama administration seems on the verge of finalizing a nuclear/peace deal with the Iranian government in Tehran, the neocons and Netanyahu himself (now Prime Minister once again) have pulled out all the stops to scupper it and put the US and Iran back on a collision course.

The neocons are also championing ongoing American support for Saudi Arabia’s brutal war in Yemen to restore that country’s US-backed former dictator. Simply because the “Houthi” rebels that overthrew him and took the capital city of Sanaa are Shiites, they are assumed to be a proxy of the Shiite Iranians, and so this is seen by neocons and Saudi theocons alike as a war against Iranian expansion.

Baghdad is a pit stop on the road to Damascus, and Sanaa is a pit stop on the road to Tehran. But, according to the Clean Breakers, Damascus and Tehran are themselves merely pit stops on the road to Beirut.

According to “A Clean Break,” Israel’s main beef with Assad is that:

“Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil.”

And its great grief with the Ayatollah is that Iran, like Syria, is one of the:

“…principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”

All regime change roads lead to Lebanon, it would seem. So this brings us back to our original question. What is the big deal about Lebanon?

The answer to this question goes back to Israel’s very beginnings. Its Zionist founding fathers established the bulk of Israel’s territory by dispossessing and ethnically cleansing three-quarters of a million Palestinian Arabs in 1948. Hundreds of thousands of these were driven (sometimes literally in trucks, sometimes force marched with gunshots fired over their heads) into Lebanon, where they were gathered in miserable refugee camps.

In Lebanon the Palestinians who had fled suffered an apartheid state almost as rigid as the one Israel imposed on those who stayed behind, because the dominant Maronite Christians there were so protective of their political and economic privileges in Lebanon’s confessional system.

In a 1967 war of aggression, Israel conquered the rest of formerly-British Palestine, annexing the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and placing the Palestinians there (many of whom fled there seeking refuge after their homes were taken by the Israelis in 1948) under a brutal, permanent military occupation characterized by continuing dispossession and punctuated by paroxysms of mass murder.

This compounding of their tragedy drove the Palestinians to despair and radicalization, and they subsequently lifted Yasser Arafat and his fedayeen (guerrilla) movement to the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), then headquartered in Jordan.

When the king of Jordan massacred and drove out the PLO, Arafat and the remaining members relocated to Lebanon. There they waged cross-border guerrilla warfare to try to drive Israel out of the occupied territories. The PLO drew heavily from the refugee camps in Lebanon for recruits.

This drew Israel deeply into Lebanese affairs. In 1976, Israel started militarily supporting the Maronite Christians, helping to fuel a sectarian civil war that had recently begun and would rage until 1990. That same year, Syrian forces entered Lebanon, partook in the war, and began a military occupation of the country.

In 1978, Israel invaded Lebanon to drive the PLO back and to recruit a proxy army called the “South Lebanon Army” (SLA).


In 1982 Israel launched a full scale war in Lebanon, fighting both Syria and the PLO. Osama bin Laden later claimed that it was seeing the wreckage of tall buildings in Beirut toppled by Israel’s “total war” tactics that inspired him to destroy American buildings like the Twin Towers.

In this war, Israel tried to install a group of Christian Fascists called the Phalange in power over Lebanon. This failed when the new Phalangist ruler was assassinated. As a reprisal, the Phalange perpetrated, with Israeli connivance, the massacre of hundreds (perhaps thousands) of Palestinian refugees and Lebanese Shiites. (See Murray Rothbard’s moving contemporary coverage of the atrocity.)


Israel’s 1982 war succeeded in driving the PLO out of Lebanon, although not in destroying it. And of course hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees still linger in Lebanon’s camps, yearning for their right of return: a fact that cannot have escaped Israel’s notice.

The Lebanese Shiites were either ambivalent or welcoming toward being rid of the PLO. But Israel rapidly squandered whatever patience the Shiites had for it by brutally occupying southern Lebanon for years. This led to the creation of Hezbollah, a Shiite militia not particularly concerned with the plight of the Sunni Palestinian refugees, but staunchly dedicated to driving Israel and its proxies (the SLA) completely out of Lebanon.

Aided by Syria and Iran, though not nearly to the extent Israel would have us believe, Hezbollah became the chief defensive force directly frustrating Israel’s efforts to dominate and exploit its northern neighbor. In 1993 and again in 1996 (the year of “A Clean Break”), Israel launched still more major military operations in Lebanon, chiefly against Hezbollah, but also bombing Lebanon’s general population and infrastructure, trying to use terrorism to motivate the people and the central government to crack down on Hezbollah.

This is the context of “A Clean Break”: Israel’s obsession with crushing Hezbollah and dominating Lebanon, even if it means turning most of the Middle East upside down (regime changing Syria, Iran, and Iraq) to do it.

9/11 paved the way for realizing the Clean Break, using the United States as a gigantic proxy, thanks to the Israel Lobby’s massive influence in Congress and the neocons’ newly won dominance in the Bush Administration.

Much to their chagrin, however, its first phase (the Iraq War) did not turn out so well for the Clean Breakers. The blundering American grunts ended up installing the most vehemently pro-Iran Shiite faction in power in Baghdad, and now Iranian troops are even stationed and fighting inside Iraq. Oops. And as it turns out, Chalabi may have been an Iranian agent all along. (But don’t worry, Mr. Perle, I’m sure he’ll eventually come through with that pipeline.)

This disastrous outcome has given both Israel and Saudi Arabia nightmares about an emerging “Shia Crescent” arcing from Iran through Iraq into Syria. And now the new Shiite “star” in Yemen completes this menacing “Star and Crescent” picture. The fears of the Sunni Saudis are partially based on sectarianism. But what Israel sees in this picture is a huge potential regional support network for its nemesis Hezbollah.


Israel would have none of it. In 2006, it launched its second full scale war in Lebanon, only to be driven back once again by that damned Hezbollah. It was time to start thinking big and regional again. As mentioned above, the Bush war on Iran didn’t pan out. (This was largely because the CIA got its revenge on the neocons by releasing a report stating plainly that Iran was not anything close to a nuclear threat.) So instead the neocons and the Saudis drew the US into what Seymour Hersh called “the Redirection” in 2007, which involved clandestine “dirty war” support for Sunni jihadists to counter Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah.

When the 2011 Arab Spring wave of popular uprisings spread to Syria, the Redirection was put into overdrive. The subsequent US-led dirty war discussed above had the added bonus of drawing Hezbollah into the bloody quagmire to try to save Assad, whose regime now finally seems on the verge of collapse.

The Clean Break is back, baby! Assad is going, Saddam is gone, and who knows: the Ayatollah may never get his nuclear deal anyway. But most importantly for “securing the realm,” Hezbollah is on the ropes.

shocking-images-iraq-war-001 3.23.13

And so what if the Clean Break was rather messy and broke so many bodies and buildings along the way? Maybe it’s like what Lenin said about omelets and eggs: you just can’t make a Clean Break without breaking a few million Arabs and a few thousand Americans. And what about all those fanatics now running rampant throughout large swaths of the world thanks to the Clean Break wars, mass-executing Muslim “apostates” and Christian “infidels” and carrying out terrorist attacks on westerners? Again, the Clean Breakers must remind themselves, keep your eye on the omelet and forget the eggs.

Well, dear reader, you and I are the eggs. And if we don’t want to see our world broken any further by the imperial clique of murderers in Washington for the sake of the petty regional ambitions of a tiny clique of murderers in Tel Aviv, we must insist on American politics making a clean break from the neocons, and US foreign policy making a clean break from Israel.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
TeamDepends's picture

I love the smell of depleted uranium, or possibly white phosphorous, in the morning.

Little Doll's picture

My best friend's ex-wife makes $75/hr on the laptop. She has been unemployed for eight months but last month her income with big fat bonus was over $9000 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site... www.jobs-review.com

maskone909's picture

side note..

ever notice those less than fortunate peeps complaining about white privilage...

oh the suffering!

i must be really unfortunate, i dont even have a tablet, or an instagram/facebook account.

ZerOhead's picture

"Osama bin Laden later claimed that it was seeing the wreckage of tall buildings in Beirut toppled by Israel’s “total war” tactics that inspired him to destroy American buildings like the Twin Towers."

So if Osama destroyed the twin towers then who destroyed WTC6 and WTC7 before any part of the South Tower had even hit the ground?


Also a little light on the genesis of ISIS. Otherwise very informative article.

TeamDepends's picture

Larry Silverstein on Building 6: "Pull me".

conscious being's picture

I think he's trying to get across that Bldg. 6 exploded as well. In fact, before Bldg. 7. Everybody here, anyways knows about Old #7.

ZerOhead's picture

Oh yes it did.

Pay special attention to the WTC6 damage in the pictures. CNN footage shows it at 1:35 as the South Tower (the first one) falls...


Another shot of WTC6 damage here... http://www.bollyn.com/public/WTC_6_blackened_prior_to_collapse.jpg


whoflungdung's picture

Thanks for that link zerohead, I hadn't seen that clip.

It fits right in Dr Judy Wood's theory of an "energy weapon."






Whatever we are being told by "THEM" is total BS

ZerOhead's picture

No energy weapons and no nukes.

Just the cores blown out of the buildings so that when WTC1 (North Tower) came down on the weakened structures they would collapse and destroy all the stuff inside that Bin Laden apparently wanted gone.

Look at the aerial overview of the entire sight.


Also remember that the North Tower did NOT come down like the South Tower. There was a 600 foot tall part of the core (the spire) that came down a couple of seconds after most of tower had hit the ground. That suggests something went wrong. Great shots here...


It was probably meant to fall to the north and take out Larry's WTC7 in the process but unfortunately it never quite made it as far as Bin Laden hoped. That's why building 7 remained standing until the final controlled demolition happened when Bin Ladens men re-entered to finish the job later in the afternoon. Just after they called the BBC reporter to tell her that WTC7 had already collapsed of course.

Get it?

cookie nookie's picture

Neo-conservatism is the worst thing that happened to our nation.  Some genius got the idea to mix the worst of right/left philosophy.  Bastards.

ZerOhead's picture

Absolutely on the first count. Heck... I can see how anyone born Jewish (the 99% variety) with an understanding of European history and several centuries of persecution by the Christians would want a safe (and extremely large and oily) place in the sun.

As for Alex Jones... I'm undergoing a re-assessment period.


Like FDR I don't buy co-incidences anymore. He is Bill Hicks. They share the same teeth, the same production company, the same friends and even Nixon's former aide and husband of Diane Sawyer Mr. Frank Gannon. That's just for starters. His voice has got to be 3 standard deviations out of normal and exhibits the exact characteristics of having undergone surgical alteration. Max Keiser is also starting to smell as much as I will still love Max...

And I really wish I didn't have to say that. Really.

TeamDepends's picture

No, 6. See youtube, we didn't know anything about it until recently either.

ZerOhead's picture

Ya... I only stumbled across it a couple of months ago myself.


WTC6 had what looks like the core blown out of it just like WTC7 (see the Barry Jennings interviews... stairwells were in the core of WTC7) before the South Tower even fell.

Firefighters on the 23rd floor of the North Tower felt an explosion that  made the building shake and a strong gust of air came out of the elevator shaft. They dove into the stairwell when it happened then the shaking in the North Tower subsided. I think it was supposed to collapse onto WTC6 and 7 at that time.

The firefighters name is James Curran and he explains what happened on page 7 of his recorded testimony. They were on 16th floor when they got the news the South Tower was hit ... the 23rd when the explosion in the North Tower occured and on the 30th floor when the South Tower came down. That's when they got the hell out of Dodge.

Read it yourself...


Looks like the North Tower was supposed to fall onto a weakened WTC6 and WTC7 first (core support most of ther building weight) thus collapsing what remained of both buildings and then the South Tower was supposed to fall last. That would have looked realistic for the video archives... but a malfunction in the explosives that  Bin Laden and his henchmen planted in the North Tower occurred instead.

How embarassing

BTW... The prior explosion damage to WTC6 was also caught on CNN at 1:35 in this video


conscious being's picture

"Bin Laden and his henchmen". You had me going thete for a moment.

Crush the cube's picture

He's just another recycled storybook character.  Black September 1973, Abu Nidal, just reverse it, Ladin, that's how the majik game has always worked.

Savyindallas's picture

If Bin laden ever said such  -it would be because he was just another CIA stooge reading a script. He had little, if anything to do with 911. It was laregly a Mossad, Neocon, Saudi intelligence operation, with the collboration of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and many other higher ups. There is no doubt about this. 

ZerOhead's picture

Nothing would have happened unless whoever was in control of the CIA wanted it to happen and since Bush and Cheney put the CIA team in that they wanted the buck stops there. Plus there is solid evidence that the buildings were mostly prepared back in 1998 to add to the confusion.

As for the Mossad? They had agents there that said they were there to "Witness the event" so we do know that they knew. But the Mossad guys with the white van and bomb(s) heading for the tunnels that the cops caught (later released) were no doubt with the guys who called in to try to blame the Palestinians. Very uncharacteristically unprofessional if the Mossad was running the show. Plus you have the complete fuck-up on WTC1. That suggests they were not calling the shots but then again what the hell do I know.

The cards the Saudis and NeoCons are left holding are looking pretty weak however. If I were Norm Mineta and a couple dozen other guys I'd be undergoing a sex change operation and moving to Nepal.

Hard Assets's picture


"So if Osama destroyed the twin towers then who destroyed WTC6 and WTC7 before any part of the South Tower had even hit the ground?" 

Question: What is the photo? Is that WTC6 blowing up with the South Tower standing beside it?

Holy mackeral, if yes, that is indeed VERY fishy.


Thanks in advance.

ZerOhead's picture


WTC6 is the low building at the far bottom left with the burn/blast marks on it. To see what it looked like before see this > https://www.google.ca/search?q=6+wtc&biw=1429&bih=718&source=lnms&tbm=is...

To see WTC6 after both towers collapsed see here > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/gz_aerial_wtc6.jpg (Core is gone)


What you see coming down is the South Tower while the North Tower remains standing


Jack Burton's picture

I fuck your best friend's wife hard!

FireBrander's picture

"My best friend's ex-wife makes $75/hr on the laptop"

Just to be clear, you're talking Johns Laptops; correct?

$75 an hour...that's a bargain...especially since "on the laptop" generally takes 10 minutes or less to complete...can i get her number?

On second thought, can I get a pic first...then I'll let you know about the need for a number.

Oh, another things, if she's on my laptop for 10 minutes, do I owe her $12.50 or is it $75 the first hour and then pro-rated each additional 15 minutes?

serotonindumptruck's picture

When you're allowed to pick and choose as to which articles of the Geneva Convention that you're going to adhere to, then what's the point?

We're all war criminals now.

FireBrander's picture

I love the smell of...well, that's a little to x-rated.

Anyway, NeoCons? WTF? We ALL KNOW the worlds problems are due to failed Liberalism. It's the Neo's that are spreading "Democracy and Freedom" dumbass; all Liberals spread is misery!


Usurious's picture
Usurious (not verified) Jul 1, 2015 9:40 PM

the US went full retard after 9/11.......by design or accident????

fuck these tribal neoZio-cons........these assholes are following the british empire playbook by the letter........




was the gold window closed by design or accident????...........


lakecity55's picture

Zionist Banksters helped direct the British Empire. Of course they have the same playbook.


But, how could Israel get the US to go hot against its enemies unless a huge surprise attack of some kind was launched on the US? Only a terrible assault might energize the US into going to war......

joego1's picture

All I know is that we have a lot of splainin to do.

ebworthen's picture

"Neocon"?  Funny, I didn't see the Demicans getting our troops out of foreign entaglements or a big peace campaign.

Obama elected 2008 and 7 years later all the same shit and failure with continued militarization abroad and at home.

How about "Bankstercon"?  That would be more appropriate, as the Banksters and the M.I.C. control .gov regardless of "Party".  Smedley Butler, Google it.

lakecity55's picture

The policy remains the same no matter who is in the oval orifice. The top Zionists are of course the Banksters. You could say they are both the employers of and the bagmen for the Neocons.

Radical Marijuana's picture

Excellent summary, lakecity55!

lolmao500's picture

When will these neo-cons fucks be arrested and hanged on the White House lawn?? And the neo-cons are still in power right now... They are in both parties. Remember, almost all the congresscritters voted for the Iraq war.

AUD's picture

When you build the gallows on the white house lawn & string them up.

Martian Moon's picture

I won't dispute the fact that Israel no longer seeks peace with its more belicos neighbours

But that it engineered all that has happened in the last few years?


Muslims need only be left alone for long enough before they go for each others' throats

No exterior effort needed


besnook's picture

the three monkeys all in one. your arguments are tiring.

Martian Moon's picture

What's even more tiring is the non stop blame the Jew attitude in the comment section of every single article

I make it a sport of counting the comments on an article before I get to the first "blame the Jew" comment and I usually can't count to ten before getting to it

11b40's picture

You want to speak to the validity of the arguments?

Martian Moon's picture


You have a construct called the state

This construct focuses the levers of power in the hands of a few and is in effect run mostly to their benefit, unbeknownst to most people

Psychopaths, by their very nature, are drawn to these levers of power and have the greatest ease in attaining them

I could not care less if these psychopath control freaks are Jews, Christians, or green Martians

I know that if even every single one of these nefarious individuals were wiped out in one fell swoop, a new crop of psychopaths would arise to replace them before the red or green blood was dry

So my problem is with the state

And my focus is on destroying the construct that facilitates so much suffering and injustice upon the world


11b40's picture

I really don't disagree with you in that psychos are attracted to power and control as moths to light, but I have yet to see any valid dispute about the fact that we have a huge disproportion of Zionists controlling our money, and our State Department, and our Defense Department,and Homeland Security, and the media, and in senior levels throughout the Federal govt.

To compound the issue, many hold dual citizenships, which to me is treasonous and insane from the start. No man can faithfully serve 2 masters.

Can you argue that our foreign  policy has not been warped in support of a tiny nation imagined into being and formed on stolen lands less than 70 years ago?  That American "leadership" is in the pocket of the Zionist lobby is not in doubt around here, and it is causing untold hardship to this country, with the public not even understanding how and why.

And hopefully I can say this without it sounding hollow, I do not put all Jews into the same basket with the Zionists, just as I don't lump all Christians or all Muslims together.  But to deny the influence of a well organized and well funded group of Zionists and Neocons on the control of American policy is to deny reality.

So, my problem is with the state, too, and the fact that it has been hijacked by an organized band of psychos, who just happen to be of the same faith and whose loyalties are not to America.

Martian Moon's picture

I will agree that lobbyists with dual Israeli / American citizenship have great influence on American foreign policy.

However that is where our agreement ends.

I will not fault lobbyists for being very good at their job.

I do fault the state for giving rise to lobbyists, and a swarm of other unintended / intended consequences.

As for the thrust of this article, that Israel is responsible for the current mess in the mideast, I actually dispute it, based on two observations:

-It was the same Israel lobby that helped overturn the Morsi government in Egypt and was instrumental in restoring military funding to the Al Sisi government, via Congress, and very much against the wishes of the State Dept and the president

-The ISIS advance towards Jordan was met with a stern warning from Israel that it would enter the war in defense of Jordan, and the advance stopped cold

So what other forces are at play?  I am guessing the same forces funding ISIS, notably the Gulf monarchies and the state dept; but it is just that, a semi informed guess.

As outsiders, you and I have access to very limited information, amongst piles of disinfo and outright propaganda, from which we speculate as to motives / what lobbyist group had more influence / on and on, as children divining from shadows on a cave wall what actually happens in the real world politic outside the cave.  A waste of time.  The problem lies with the state.

Enjoy this fourth of July, your state loves you.

The Delicate Genius's picture
The Delicate Genius (not verified) Martian Moon Jul 2, 2015 3:06 PM

So is blaming Israel's government, or Israel's lobby, or the acts of a handful of mostly Jewish Zionists in the OSP - is that "blame the Jew" for you?

Is it your position that anytime someone alleges that a crime was committed, it is "blame the Jew" if the criminals are Jewish, but if its any non-Jew at all, its just blaming the criminal?

What, precisely, is your argument - that the neocons weren't' mostly Jewish Zionists? If that's the case, you're simply wrong.

I'm trying to understand whether you think Jewish Zionists really played no role, or if you're complaining that any article which discusses the role of this "transparant cabal" is blaming "the Jews" because, clearly, the neocons were largely Israel Firster zionists - in which case, aren't you basically arguing it is "anti-Semitic" to discuss wrongdoing by Jews?

If so - that is absurd.

11b40's picture

......and see my answer to your answer.

lolmao500's picture

The CIA should man up and do political assassinations in the US too... for once the CIA could do something good FOR the people instead of funding and arming terrorists. They have experience in regime change... maybe they should use that here and take out the scum so that a REAL regime change for the people happens...

After Argentina collapsed, a bunch of cops created black ops death squads and went out killing known bad guys at night. At some point journalists found out and they had to stop...

RMolineaux's picture

Apparently you are not aware that the CIA and the FBI are already assassinating political dissidents in the US.

lolmao500's picture

I knew that. It's just that they should do it FOR THE PEOPLE. FOR THE CONSTITUTION. This is a war. And the CIA, for the moment, is with the enemy.

Savyindallas's picture

The CIA are the bad guys. You'd have to clean house completely and replace them with honest Patriots before suggesting they be given any power to assasinate anyone. 

besnook's picture

zh posting its first article explicitly blaming the jews is a milestone. does that mean sawyer can come back?

Billy the Poet's picture

His observations such as "the Jews are watering down the beer" were so illuminating.


The Double Identity of an "Anti-Semitic" Commenter




conscious being's picture

Excellent link Billy. Who downvoted you?