Israel? What? — Duke offers evidence of how Iraq is a war for Israel


The Primary Orchestrators of the Iraq War, Jewish Extremists

Israel? What?

—– Original Message —–
From: jerrynalley
To: David Duke
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 7:47 PM
Subject: Israel? What?

Dear Mr. Duke, I read your article about the disgruntled lady protesting at President Bush, Crawford , Tx ranch. How is it that we are fighting in Iraq to protect Israel?

Seeing as you make claims such as these then you should be able to back them up , with facts.

I know that Israel does not need our American soldiers’ help in protecting itself from 3rd world countries such as Iraq. They could easily wipe that country off the map if they wanted to. Per capita they have one of the most powerful militaries in the world.

Any war ever fought by the US military has been met with some sort of protest or hatred toward our country.

Remember one thing hindsight is always 20-20. So let me hear your claims backed up by facts , not coincidence.

One more question for you , What makes this lady anymore privileged to meet the President face to face than any other mother or loved one that has died in any war that has been fought in the last 150 years or so?

Just curious. I’m open minded , want to here you explain. Thats all.
Please write back.

Thank You , Jerry

David Duke

Dear Jerry,

Thanks for your inquiry, you seem to be sincerely seeking the truth in the real sources of the Iraq war, so I will be happy to spend some time with you giving a short rundown of the evidence. I will share this with many other readers as we are getting a huge number of visits to our website as a result of the Cindy Sheehan issue.

There is plenty of documented evidence that this war was and is a war orchestrated by radical Jewish elements for Israel rather than American interests. The key placement of these Jewish elements for this war goes far beyond coincidence.

Before I back up this claim, let me deal with your argument that Israel “does not need our American soldiers’ help in protecting itself from 3rd world countries such as Iraq. They could easily wipe that country off the map if they wanted to. Per capita they have one of the most powerful militaries in the world.”

The truth is Jerry, that this powerful military force of Israel would not at all be possible except for their inordinate influence in the American political process that has caused more than 100 billion dollars of US taxpayer money to go to this tiny foreign country. Not only does Israel have the largest lobby in the U.S. Congress, AIPAC, but high officials in that organization have recently been indicted for espionage against America. And, our support of Israel has cost us trillions of additional dollars over the years in oil and other costs and certainly has greatly contributed to hatred against America and even the horrendous 911 attacks.

To think that Israel could afford the Iraq War now, running toward a national expenditure of 300 billion dollars, or have the manpower to occupy and control Iraq is ludicrous. America with all our might can’t really win this war, and more importantly it is making us lose the larger war, it is bringing on incredible hatred toward America all over the world and evoking huge popular support for the terrorists. Because of this war we will face terrorism for years to come. If Israel would have tried to invade and occupy Iraq, the outcry and terrorist activity would have been almost solely directed toward that nation. So the suggestion that Israel could have done it itself is quite incorrect.

In fact, Israel gets a double benefit from this war: one, they use our blood and treasure to pursue their agenda and two, they get their mortal enemies to focus more on harming America and Americans than Israel. That’s pretty clever.

Now, let me offer you some data on the original and primary supporters of this war.

They are the so-called Neocons, or Neoconservatives, who are overwhelmingly Jewish and, not just coincidentally, mostly former Trotskyites and Communists! I am not exaggerating this fact one bit. They have turned Conservatism on its ear, from a nationalist position to one of liberal social positions, internationalism, and globalism. Neocons, for instance, have been the primary cause of the fact that many so-called Conservative magazines and leaders today support opening America’s borders and turning our European American majority into a minority. They also support the free trade policy that is undermining America.

The major promoters of the Iraq War were Neoconservatives such as Wolfowitz, Perle, Wurmser, Feith, Kristol, Abrams, Frum, Podhoretz, and a host of other radically Jewish individuals and a few Gentiles thrown in for good measure. They are overwhelmingly Zionist Jews who have a long history of devotion to the radical Likud Party and to Israel above all else. They were the primary formulators and advocates of this war. And it is only the fact of massive Jewish, pro-Israel media in America that made their false claims against Iraq fly. The rest of the world was not fooled, but then the rest of the world, except perhaps Britain, does not have a media so dominated by Jewish extremists.

One of the major individuals with government connections who was behind the war was Richard Perle, who along with Douglas Feith and David Wurmser wrote a paper called “A Clean Break, a New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” It was about creating a war with Iraq, Syria and Iran, and it was written for Israel, not America. We have followed that strategy right down the line. You probably already know that even the mainstream media acknowledges that the two main advocates of the war were Perle and Wolfowitz.

Many men close to the President at the time the war was launched were Jewish radicals, such as his chief speech writer David Frum, and the man who was his primary spokesman to
America and the world, Ari Fleischer.

It has been revealed that much of the false evidence to justify the war was supplied by Israel.

Even the man in charge of the American intelligence of evidence for war was Stuart Cohen, a rabid Israel-Firster.

The media can be shown to be heavily dominated by Jewish radicals who campaigned for this war incessantly. Please read the “Who Runs the Media” excerpt from my book My Awakening and you will shocked by the incredibly strong influence of these people over the American media.

I will include a link to a good article by Pat Buchanan, and you can find many more by myself and others on my website or linked from my website. They are fully documented.

You can also read my book Jewish Supremacism which gives a good rundown of the war.

Here are some starting points in your inquiry into this question:

1) An article by Patrick Buchanan on Whose War is It.

2) An excellent article on the Neocons as a Jewish Movement by Dr. Kevin MacDonald.

This is an excerpt of a scholarly paper by a leading University Professor who is an expert on the question. By the way, this one lengthy article has over 260 footnotes documenting every quotation he uses. It is an extremely powerful article detailing this dangerous movement.

Perle was the “Study Group Leader” of a 1996 report titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” published by the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), an Israeli think tank. The membership of the study group illustrates the overlap between Israeli think tanks close to the Israeli government, American policy makers and government officials, and pro-Israel activists working in the United States. Other members of this group who accepted positions in the George W. Bush administration or in pro-Israel activist organizations in the U.S. include Douglas Feith (Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Policy), David Wurmser (member of IASPS, a protégé of Perle at AEI, and senior advisor in the State Department), Mayrev Wurmser (head of the Hudson Institute, a Neocon think tank), James Colbert of JINSA, and Jonathan Torop (WINEP).

Despite Joshua Muravchik’s apologetic claims, the “Clean Break” report was clearly intended as advice for another of Perle’s personal friends, Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then the new prime minister of Israel; there is no indication that it was an effort to further U.S. interests in the region. The purpose was to “forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism.” Indeed, the report advises the United States to avoid pressure on the Israelis to give land for peace, a strategy “which required funneling American money to repressive and aggressive regimes, was risky, expensive, and very costly for both the U.S. and Israel, and placed the United States in roles it should neither have nor want.” The authors of the report speak as Jews and Israelis, not as U.S. citizens: “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble.” Much of the focus is on removing the threat of Syria, and it is in this context that the report notes, “This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq—an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right—as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.”

Proposals for regime change, such as found in “A Clean Break,” have a long history in Israeli thought. For example, in 1982 Israeli strategist Oded Yinon echoed a long line of Israeli strategists who argued that Israel should attempt to dissolve all the existing Arab states into smaller, less potentially powerful states. These states would then become clients of Israel as a regional imperial power. Neocons have advertised the war in Iraq as a crusade for a democratic, secular, Western-oriented, pro-Israel Iraq—a dream that has a great deal of appeal in the West, for obvious reasons. However, it is quite possible that the long-term result is that Iraq would fracture along ethnic and religious lines (Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds). This would also be in Israel’s interests, because the resulting states would pose less of a threat than the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein. As Yinon noted, “Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel.”

Former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson has suggested that the dissolution of Iraq may well have been a motive for the war:

A more cynical reading of the agenda of certain Bush advisers could conclude that the Balkanization of Iraq was always an acceptable outcome, because Israel would then find itself surrounded by small Arab countries worried about each other instead of forming a solid block against Israel. After all, Iraq was an artificial country that had always had a troublesome history.

And as the Iraqi insurgency has achieved momentum, there is evidence that Israeli military and intelligence units are operating in Kurdish regions of Iraq and that Israel is indeed encouraging the Kurds to form their own state. There is little doubt that an independent Kurdish state would have major repercussions for Syria and Iran, as well as for Israel’s ally Turkey, and would lead to continuing instability in the Middle East. A senior Turkish official noted, “If you end up with a divided Iraq, it will bring more blood, tears, and pain to the Middle East, and [the U.S.] will be blamed…From Mexico to Russia, everybody will claim that the United States had a secret agenda in Iraq: you came there to break up Iraq. If Iraq is divided, America cannot explain this to the world.”

I suggest you link to and read the entire article and think about it carefully.

Good luck in your investigation.

Any further question you might have, I will be happy to address them within the constraints of my time, as I have many obligations.

One more point. All this is not about the “right” of Cindy Sheehan to meet with the President about the war. It is about the fact that the President should be accountable for the lies and misrepresentations that have resulted in the death of her son and the death and maiming of thousands of more Americans. It is about his allowing these Jewish extremists with loyalty to Israel rather than America to manipulate our nation into this insane war which has inflicted so much terrible damage on America as well as horrible consequences for the Iraqi people.

Truth and justice is supposed to be what America is all about.

Sincerely,

David Duke

Also here is the link to my chapter on Who Runs the Media?

Slider by webdesign