NeoCon At Globalist Think-Tank Says Use False Flag to Start War With Iran

Evidence of the power of WINES was manifested in the bill HR 4133 which allocates US resources to Israel at the expense of the taxpayer. This legislation marks Obama’s unwavering commitment to Israel as a puppet of the global Elite.

Mainstream media is following the Zionist script to the letter in regard to the false claims of Iranian endeavors to build nuclear weapons. Now there are reports that Iran is capable of launching a pre-emptive strike should Israel attack, as they are threatening to do.

FBI Investigating NeoCon Lobbyist For False Flag Terrorism Threats

Pete goes over the events surrounding the controversial call for a false flag by The Washington Institutes Patrick Clawson and calls the FBI field office in Washington DC to ask that the matter be investigated. Officer 1642 of the FBI promised to look into the matter.

Mr. Clawson said last Friday in a meeting that included the Atlantic Counsel he was not advocating anything but that getting the President to move on the matter of going to war with Iran would be hard and that a iranian submarine could just go down one day and never come back up … He then asked, “who would know?” Clawson used historical false flag attacks as examples such as Pearl Harbor and the Gulf of Tonkin to show how false flags are effective in a Presidents call to war. In the second hour Pete talks about the misinformation surrounding the murder and Rape of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the similarities to the rape and murder of Maummar Gaddafi. People in the region are calling the incident payback for the death of Gaddafi and that it had nothing to do with The film Innocense of Muslims.

Read the entire article

Neo-cons of today: premium ignorance

Romney’s sycophantic support for Netanyahu and his reliance on neo-conservative retreads from the Bush-Cheney administration has all but erased any standing the Republican nominee has in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Romney’s hitching of his Middle East foreign policy wagon to Netanyahu received a severe blow when Netanyahu delivered a school teacher-like lecture to the UN General Assembly on setting a “red line” representing 90 percent uranium enrichment for Iran’s nuclear program. Read the entire article

The neocons inside Mitt Romney’s head

Romney and Paul Ryan haven’t spent time thinking and speaking a lot about foreign policy. They have simply taken the path of least resistance and parroted the views of their neocon advisers. They talk all tough at Iran and Syria and label the president a weak apologist and buildup bogymen and rant about how America must dictate events in the Middle East. That’s not a doctrine; it’s a treacherous neocon echo. It’s amazing that many of the neocons who were involved in the Iraq debacle are back riding high. (Foreign Policy magazine reports that 17 of Romney’s 24 special advisers on foreign policy were in W.’s administration.) But no one has come along to replace them, or reinstitute some kind of Poppy Bush-James Baker-Brent Scowcroft realpolitik internationalism. The neocons are still where the GOP intellectual energy is, and they’re still in the blogosphere hammering candidates who stray from their hawkish orthodoxy. Democrats have claimed the international centre once inhabited by Bush senior and his advisers. Read the entire article

Maureen Dowd / Outsourced foreign policy: Romney leaves it to bellicose neocons and right-wing think tanks

It's amazing that many of the neocons who were involved in the Iraq debacle are back riding high. (Foreign Policy magazine reports that 17 of Mr. Romney's 24 special advisers on foreign policy were in W.'s administration.) But no one has come along to replace them or reinstitute some kind of Poppy Bush/James Baker/Brent Scowcroft realpolitik internationalism.

The neocons are still where the GOP intellectual energy is, and they're still in the blogosphere hammering candidates who stray from their hawkish orthodoxy. Democrats have claimed the international center once inhabited by Bush senior and his advisers.

Read the entire article

NeoCon At Globalist Think-Tank Says Use False Flag to Start War With Iran

Patrick Clawson, a member of the globalist-controlled and neo-con influenced think-tan Washington Institute for Near East Studies,(WINES) recently spoke about the use of false flags as a necessary way for instigating a war with Iran.

Clawson remarked that Obama has had a difficult time “getting the US into a war with Iran” and advocated the use of conventional means (i.e. using a false flag to provoke a military strike).

Read the entire article

Romney Foreign Policy Shows Strong CFR, Neo-con Influence

William Kristol deserves special mention, due to his background in one America’s premier neoconservative families. He is founder of The Weekly Standard, which has been described as a "redoubt of neoconservatism" and as "the neo-con bible."

Kristol’s father, the late Irving Kristol, served as the managing editor of Commentary magazine and has been described as the "godfather of neoconservatism." (More about neoconservatism in a moment.)

A look at Reuel Marc Gerecht and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the other organization mentioned by the Times, shows a similar neoconservative bent. Gerecht is a former director of the Project for the New American Century's Middle East Initiative and a former resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. The Project for the New American Century was co-founded by the previously mentioned neo-con William Kristol and CFR member Robert Kagan. As for the American Enterprise Institute, a Wikipedia article notes:

Read the entire article

The Neocon Behind the Charge that Libertarians are Hedonists

As an addendum to my post on Jeremy Egerer and specifically his claim that libertarians "seek civilization in earthly pleasure," i.e. libertarians are hedonists, Murray Rothbard points out that the charge was initially made by the original neocon, Irving Kristol. Rothbard, long ago, demolished this myth:

This myth has recently been propounded by Irving Kristol, who identifies the libertarian ethic with the "hedonistic" and asserts that libertarians "worship the Sears Roebuck catalogue and all the 'alternative life styles' that capitalist affluence permits the individual to choose from."
 

Read the entire article

Neocons Gather To Fete Iraq War Godfather

At Bernard Lewis’s neocon gala, the talk was of war, peace, democracy and Muslims.

But in a room full of onetime advocates of the second Iraq War, no one much wanted to talk about a possible military strike on Iran.

Paul Wolfowitz, the Bush administration Pentagon official who pushed hard for an invasion of Iraq in 2003, chatted during cocktail hour with Judith Miller, the former New York Times reporter whose discredited reports on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq whipped up support for that invasion. At dinner, Henry Kissinger and billionaire conservative donor Bruce Kovner shared a table.

An Israeli consul general and the publisher of the New York Daily News were there, as was Itamar Rabinovich, the former Israeli ambassador and prominent academic. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent a letter of congratulations.

Read the entire article

The Neo-Con Islamist Hokey Pokey

At the same time, ex-liberals like Irving Kristol turn a growing disenchantment with LBJ’s Great Society into a new kind of conservatism, one obsessed not with individual liberty, but collective liberty centered around a mythical enemy (Islam!) (Liberals!) (Reds!).

The film hinges on comparing the two movements as ideologies rooted in the same ideals: a staunch opposition to liberalism, the existence of a shadowy and existential threat to “our” way of life, and the centrality of society’s moral decay. The film is a re-dux of one of my favorite innovations in political philosophy, the Horseshoe Theory. It says that the ends of the political spectrum sit not farthest apart, but closest together—much like the ends of a horseshoe. The paradigm places moderates farthest from each other and extremists closest together.

Read the entire article

More Evidence Neocon Network Behind “Innocence of Muslims” Video

In an article breaking down the linkages behind the “Innocence of Muslims” video, Justin Raimondo points to a chart on The Flower Throwers website:

Drilling down the chart, we see the same old cast of neocon characters who have worked tirelessly to keep the anti-Muslim agenda front and center and thus feed the war on terror against Israel’s enemies. Principle among these are David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes and Aubrey Chernick.

Chernick is the lesser known of the three. He runs a Los Angeles-area software company named the National Center for Crisis and Continuity Coordination and is a former trustee of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a think tank for Democrat neocons (disgraced sexting Democrat Anthony Weiner once described this faction as “the ZOA [Zionist Organization of America] wing of the Democratic Party”). WINEP is a project of AIPAC, the Israeli pressure group. Chernick’s fortune is dedicated to funding the Anti-Defamation League and CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America), a group that counters negative reporting on Israel.

Daniel Pipes is the well-known Islamophobe who founded the Middle East Forum (MEF), an organization that attacks academics for criticizing Israel. MEF specializes in drawing attention to the so-called “Islamic network” in the United States. “Quietly, lawfully, peacefully, Islamists do their work throughout the West to impose aspects of Islamic law, win special privileges for themselves, shut down criticism of Islam, create Muslim-only zones, and deprive women and non-Muslims of their full civil rights,” Pipes wrote in 2008. He has supported many Likudnik and neocon initiatives and organizations, including the now-defunct Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the Israel-based advocacy outfit Jerusalem Summit, and the U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon. Pipes was also a scholar at WINEP.

David Horowitz, a former radical Marxist, is a key member of the neocon intelligentsia. As Infowars.com has noted, Horowitz has taken money from CIA operative Richard Mellon Scaife. The David Horowitz Freedom Center is affiliated with Jihad Watch, the virulent anti-Muslim website run by anti-Islam blogger and author Robert Spencer, who along with Islamophobe Pam Geller (who founded Stop Islamization of America) plays an instrumental role in the “Innocence of Muslims” operation. Horowitz has described Islam as a religion of “hate, violence and racism.” Both Horowitz and Pipes have donated money to Geert Wilders, the Dutch anti-Muslim politician.
The more we learn about the “Innocence of Muslims” video, the more obvious it becomes that it was devised by a group of Islamophobes and hardcore radical Israel supporters to further enflame tensions in the Middle East.

The neocon Clash of Civilizations narrative requires an ultimate conflict between the West and Islam. We are now witnessing neocons in both establishment parties and Likudnik fanatics pushing religious and ethnic hatred and conflict to its zenith as the United States and Israel prepare a coordinated attack on Iran that will undoubtedly result in a world war with cataclysmic proportion.

Anti-Muslim Film Setting The Stage For October Surprise?

Mitt Romney speaks like a neocon, but is he one?

Mitt Romney has preferred to keep to economic issues in his presidential campaign, but when he has turned to foreign policy he’s revealed the influence of the muscular, with-us-or-against-us neoconservative thinking that waxed strong in the George W. Bush administration.

That was true last week when Governor Romney excoriated President Obama for what he said was a weak and apologetic response to anti-American violence in the Middle East. It came through again Tuesday in the video that surfaced with Romney telling donors in Florida that the Palestinians “have no interest whatsoever” in peace.

“We’re seeing in Romney’s pronouncements the strain of the Vulcans, the extremist form of vulcanism together with the evangelical position on Israel,” says Geoffrey Kemp, a foreign policy expert at Washington’s Center for the National Interest, a realist think tank. “It’s very,

The Mystery of Neocon Influence

The success the war-promoters had, with an energetic sales campaign amid a post-9/11 political milieu, in getting many Republicans and Democrats alike to go along with their project has lessened the inclination to call the neocons fully to account. Those who went along at the time do not want to be reminded of that.

There has consequently been a blurring of the distinction between the promoters and mere followers. When Paul Wolfowitz was on Fox News the other day to join in criticizing the Obama administration for its “apologetic posture” toward the Muslim world, the host introduced him as “one of the people who believed that we needed to go to war with Iraq,” as if he had been just another congressman who voted for the war resolution.

Chickenhawks Come Home To Roost — in BOTH Parties

Lew, apparently the neocons are digging up their old playbook from the early Bush years: everyone who opposes them is an anti-Semite.

Once again, we have the wonderful Trotskyite dialectic — what Orwell called "DoubleThink": what was bad for Maureen Dowd to say (neocons have commandeered the Romney Campaign) is proclaimed with proud braggadocio when uttered by a neocon (Obama is a "born-again neocon," boasts Kid Kristol).

How can this be? Here is the key: Dr. Paul correctly identified the neocon principle of "noble lying" almost ten years ago — long before the nation had to suffer the disastrous consequences. "Truth will make you free," said Solzhenitsyn (NOT a neocon!), but falsehood always brings violence in its wake."

The forbidden question: Why can neocons celebrate their triumphs freely, while critics who point them out are vilified as bigots?

And it's curious, isn't it, that those who pulled the trigger on Dowd for telling the truth didn't brag about it instead? Here enters DoubleThink: They did, they do, and they will. After all, two "born-again neocons" are the major party "choices" in the coming presidential elections.

The neocons can't lose. Their dirty little secret? DoubleThink dialectic allows them to weep, even as they gloat.

Romney reveals neocon tendencies

What is clear is that this Republican assault was not a spur of the moment off-hand verbal gaffe. Rather, it was a coordinated attack that reflected a consistent mindset shaped by the neoconservative criticism of Obama's Middle East diplomacy and, I might add, diplomacy in general.

The world, as seen by the neocons, is one of black and white absolutes. We, Americans, are good. Inherently good. And our goodness is measured not by what we do, but who we are. Our goodness is ordained to confront evil and is destined to triumph. But our victory is assured only if we remain resolute, because our enemies take advantage of any display of weakness. For that reason, neocons maintain that we do not negotiate with evil - hence diplomacy is eschewed in favour of military strength and "resolve".

Mock on, Maureen Dowd: Why She’s Right About the Neo-cons

In the twilight years of the New Left, revolutionaries would regularly parse their adversaries’ statements for indications of “objective racism.” Even the slightest irregularity—calling someone’s thoughts “dark”—could unleash a volley of accusations. I was reminded of this in reading the responses to Maureen Dowd’s recent column, “Neocons Slither Back,” about the neo-conservative influence on Mitt Romney’s foreign policy.

A host of people have accused Dowd of anti-Semitism for using a term “puppet master” to describe Romney’s advisor Dan Senor and for implying that Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan are “foreign policy neophytes” who have received their current ideas about the world from neo-conservative intellectuals who previously prodded “an insecure and uninformed president into invading Iraq.”

Is Mitt Romney a neocon?

In the wake of renewed Mideast violence, neocons — still tarred by their hawkishness during the Bush years — are embracing Mitt as one of their own.

Mitt Romney has taken a lot of heat, even from fellow Republicans, for his swift attacks on President Obama's handling of last week's first embassy protests in Egypt. One group, however, enthusiastically rallied to his side: Neoconservatives — the foreign-policy hawks who support using military might to spread democracy and defend U.S. interests abroad — argue that Romney was right to accuse Obama of projecting weakness. Of course, such support can be a mixed blessing for the GOP presidential candidate. Neocons like William Kristol and Liz Cheney, whose ideology defined George W. Bush's foreign policy, bring a lot of baggage with them, thanks largely to the problematic way the Iraq war unfolded. So Romney is left facing a delicate balancing act: He won't want to distance himself from a key GOP constituency, but likely wants to avoid the unpopular "neocon" label. So: Is Romney essentially a neocon, or isn't he?

Yes. Neocons have Romney in their clutches and are making him one of their own: After 9/11, neocons "captured one Republican president who was naïve about the world," says Maureen Dowd in The New York Times. They're at it again. Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, have no experience abroad, but their "disdain for weakness and diplomacy" and enthusiasm for bombing Israel's neighbors (look out, Iran) sound "ominously familiar." Why? When their lips move, you're hearing the voice of their neocon puppet masters.
"Neocons slither back"

Neocons Engineering October Surprise?

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show on Sunday, Webster Tarpley said the video is part of an ambitious international intelligence operation aimed at creating an October Surprise designed to install Mitt Romney and his coterie of Bush-era neocons in the White House.

“The pro-Israeli neocons of the Bush-Cheney era have attached themselves to Romney as their main hope of getting back into power,” Tarpley wrote for Infowars.com on Sunday. He attributed the video “trailer” to “a well-known Islamophobic network reputedly inspired by US intelligence,” a network that includes “Pamela Geller, a notorious professional Islamophobe.”

Why are the Neocons Still Around?

Recent attempts by adversaries of President Obama to blame him for yet another undesirable circumstance—in this case, popular outrage in the Middle East over an anti-Islam video—reminds us of one of the oddest aspects of discourse in the United States about foreign and security policy: that the same people who not too many years ago inflicted on us the Iraq War are still part of that discourse. They get air time and column space, and evidently at least somebody seems to be listening to them.

One mistake should not condemn someone to silence, but we are not talking about just any old mistake. The Iraq War was one of the biggest and costliest blunders in the history of U.S. foreign relations. The human and material costs, including an ultimate fiscal and economic toll in the multiple trillions in addition to the political and diplomatic damage, have been immense. Moreover, promotion of that war demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of fault lines in the Middle East, political culture in the region, the nature of political change there, the roots of enmity and security threats toward the United States, and the limitations of U.S. power and especially military power. There is no reason anyone should pay one iota of attention to what the promoters of that war have to say today on anything related to those subjects. And yet those are the very sorts of subjects, often with particular reference to countries such as Iran, Syria and Libya, on which neocon promoters of the Iraq War expound today.

Mitt Romney, nationalist

The case that Romney’s reaction was neoconservative (if Horowitz had cared to present one) would have to rest on the candidate’s statement that is “a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values.” But this sentiment is not confined to neoconservatives. Romney’s articulation of it is so widely shared that no politician, including Obama, would publicly advocate its negation — i.e. that it is sometimes a good course for America to apologize for its values.

Those who see neocons under their bed, or who exploit the term for ulterior motives, are missing a key point: unwillingness to apologize for American values is not the same thing as being willing to impose them on others through military, or even political, action.

Netanyahu's Neocon Gambit

It is hard to overestimate the risks that Benjamin Netanyahu poses to the future of his own country. As Prime Minister, he has done more than any other political figure to embolden and elevate the reactionary forces in Israel, to eliminate the dwindling possibility of a just settlement with the Palestinians, and to isolate his country on the world diplomatic stage. Now Netanyahu seems determined, more than ever, to alienate the President of the United States and, as an ally of Mitt Romney’s campaign, to make himself a factor in the 2012 election—one no less pivotal than the most super Super PAC. “Who are you trying to replace?” the opposition leader, Shaul Mofaz, asked of Netanyahu in the Knesset on Wednesday. “The Administration in Washington or that in Tehran?”

Mofaz, a former Defense Minister, who participated in the fabled raid on Entebbe, in 1976, along with the Prime Minister’s brother, was reacting to Netanyahu’s outburst against the Obama Administration, at a news conference in Jerusalem. “The world tells Israel ‘Wait, there’s still time,’ ” Netanyahu told reporters in English. “And I say, ‘Wait for what? Wait until when?’ Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.”

Romney runs from ‘neocon’ label– because Americans reject neoconservatism by more than 2 to 1!

The Washington Post reports that Romney doesn't want to be called a neocon, even though he's mobbed up with neocons:

The Romney campaign does not dispute that Mitt Romney is a neoconservative, it just refuses to say the word neoconservative.

“His embrace of American values and interests and his call for American leadership abroad throughout this campaign is indicative of a philosophy of peace through strength,” Alex Wong, the campaign’s foreign policy director, said in an interview.

Obama harshly criticized by neocon wing of GOP over Libya attack

South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham came out Wednesday offering a harsh criticism of Mr. Obama saying, “This administration has no concept of the Arab Spring. They’re disengaging and the lack of leadership is about to lead to an explosion in the Middle East.”

Graham wasn’t alone. His Senate colleague, Sen. John McCain (R) Arizona also said Obama is “weak in his leadership” while being interviewed by Anderson Cooper on CNN yesterday.

McCain, a man who never met a war he didn’t like, did sneak in this one comment during the interview concerning the late ambassador:

Mitt Romney: Still Infatuated With Discredited Neocon Ideas About Foreign Policy

I want to connect the Romney statement—now so well-critiqued (see, for instance, William Saletan’s superb post on Slate today) to the point made by Kurt Eichenwald in his Sept. 10 New York Times op-ed and then further on my Current show that evening. The White House received about 70 CIA briefings stressing the imminence of an al-Qaida attack before 9/11, and yet didn’t sufficiently respond. A reason for this, Eichenwald said, is the prism through which the Bush White House saw the world. The neocons who were making decisions could not understand that nonstate actors such as Osama Bin Laden were perhaps just as important as the traditional state actors they had dealt with during their last time in the White House, eight years earlier. This may have led them to discount the importance of the new terrorist threat while focusing almost exclusively on the threat of Iraq.

So it is with Romney. The same neocons still surround him. He seems to still view the world and its threats through a Cold War prism, misunderstanding the threats that actually exist. The ultimate outcome of the Arab Spring is impossible to predict. But the one clear point so far is that Romney and his team have misstated what happened, misunderstood what needs to be done, and let politics intercede where careful diplomacy was needed. Bluster is not diplomacy, and a lack of understanding of history does not make good policy.

Exposure Of Neocon American And Zionist Imperialist 9-11 Deception

The late American anti-war, pro-Humanity writer Gore Vidal put it succinctly in declaring that “ Unlike most Americans who lie all the time, I hate lying ” see “Mainstream media lying”:

https://sites.google.com/site/mainstreammedialying/home ). Two nonprofit US journalism groups, the Center for Public Integrity and the affiliated Fund for Independence in Journalism, estimated that the Bush Administration told 935 lies about Iraq between 9-11 and the invasion of that ancient and now devastated country (see “Study: Bush, aides made 935false statements in run-up to war”, CNN, 23 January 2008:

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-01-23/politics/bush.iraq_1_intelligence-flaws-iraq-and-al-qaeda-study?_s=PM:POLITICS ) . Yet Mainstream media around the World blindly accept the lying Bush “official version of 9-11” despite compelling contrary advice from science, architecture, engineering, aviation, military and intelligence experts that the US did 9-11(see “Experts: US did 9-11”:

https://sites.google.com/site/expertsusdid911/ ). Similarly, Mainstream media have been complicit in massive lying by omission about 11 million preventable American deaths since 9-11 and the deaths of 9 million Muslims from violence or war-imposed deprivation in the post-2001 War on Terror – Western Mainstream media have resolutely ignored the avoidable deaths of some 20 million people linked to the US War on Terror, half of the victims being American.

Decent people around the World must realize the awful extent of this Neocon American and Zionist Imperialist 9-11 deception that has so far killed 21 million fellow human beings but which is resolutely ignored by Neocon American- and Zionist Imperialist-beholden mainstream media. The neo-liberal argument is that suspension of human rights at home and an endless War on Terror from Libya to Pakistan is required to prevent a repetition of 9-11 (3,000 dead) or a lesser atrocity such as the Madrid, London and Mumbai atrocities (scores to hundreds killed) . Yet the warmongers resolutely lie by omission over 20 million deaths, half American, linked to this same War on Terror.

Neocon Gambits

It is hard to overestimate the risks that Benjamin Netanyahu poses to the future of his own country. As Prime Minister, he has done more than any other political figure to embolden and elevate the reactionary forces in Israel, to eliminate the dwindling possibility of a just settlement with the Palestinians, and to isolate his country on the world diplomatic stage. Now Netanyahu seems determined, more than ever, to alienate the President of the United States and, as an ally of Mitt Romney’s campaign, to make himself a factor in the 2012 election—one no less pivotal than the most super Super PAC. “Who are you trying to replace?” the opposition leader, Shaul Mofaz, asked of Netanyahu in the Knesset on Wednesday. “The Administration in Washington or that in Tehran?”

The neocon strategy, in both Israel and the U.S., is to paint Obama as naïve in the extreme. In this, Netanyahu and Romney are united—and profoundly cynical.

Michael Tomasky on Mitt Romney’s Total Neocon Meltdown

We know that we saw something appalling yesterday, in Mitt Romney’s response to the violence in Cairo and Benghazi, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that we’re witnessing something historic too. This isn’t simply the end of the Republican Party’s decades-long political advantage on foreign policy that we’re observing. Rather, we are simultaneously able to see how the party is reacting to and dealing with the disappearance of that advantage. It’s like those villains in the movies who not only are dying, but who register on their face that they can’t comprehend they’re dying, that Hell has finally called their malevolent number, like Julia Roberts’s husband in Sleeping With The Enemy. God, it’s fun to watch. But it’s also a reminder of the danger of handing power to this man and the people he would bring in with him.

Marx would be completely dead if we didn’t have the Republicans around to prove him right every so often. Yet here we are in 2012, able to say definitively that the moment of greatest apparent Republican foreign-policy triumph—spring and summer of 2003—contained, in good Marxian fashion, the seeds of its own destruction. That’s when neoconservatism and its grand theories seemed to be on the cusp of a great vindication. The Iraq effort became disastrous, but even into 2005, with the advent of the great uprising in Lebanon and the blessed end of the Syrian occupation, for which Bush deserved and received some credit, no honest liberal skeptic could be completely sure that Wolfowitz & co. had everything wrong.

Would Neocons Control Romney?

Citing findings in the recently released poll of American opinion on foreign policy conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Drezner observes that “most of America — and independents in particular — want pretty much the opposite of” what Romney says he wants regarding increased military spending and more hawkish policies toward Iran, Syria, Russia, China, North Korea and illegal immigration.

Drezner further notes that what is striking in the poll results is “how much the majority view on foreign policy jibes with what the Obama administration has been doing in the world: military retrenchment from the Greater Middle East, a reliance on diplomacy and sanctions to deal with rogue states, a refocusing on East Asia, and prudent cuts in defense spending.”

9/11: When The Facts Didn't Fit Their Neocon Fantasy

Astounding. This New York Times oped piece by Kurt Eichenwald says the neocon influence in the Bush White House was so all-consuming, so rigid, that when President Bush received numerous intelligence briefings about an impending attack by bin Laden, they decided it was an attempt to distract them from Saddam Hussein. Frightening, just how criminally negligent they were - and they've never admitted they were wrong, not even after all this time and all these people dead:

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

Romney Had Best Not Listen to Bush’s ‘Neocon Lunatics’

Is Mitt Romney taking advice from too many neoconservative Bush advisers? For Russia’s Izvestia, influential Russian analyst Andranik Migranyan, who is thought to have Putin’s ear, writes that Romney’s comments about Russia and the world make it imperative – for the sakes of America and the world – that if he wins in November, he act as he did as Massachusetts governor: realistically. And in any case, America lacks the cash to follow the precepts of the neocons he surrounds himself with.

For Izvestia, Andranik Migranyan writes in part:

I would like to address how Republicans view America’s place in the international community. Unfortunately, up to now, the impression has been, as Talleyrand said of the Bourbons after the restoration of the monarchy, “they have forgotten nothing, and learned nothing.” The Republicans criticize Obama’s foreign policy on all fronts. The criticism is often forced and absolutely baseless. Particularly when it come to Obama’s attempts to normalize relations with other countries and U.S. allies, marred by the Bush Administration’s condescending policy of unilateral domination. In this context, it is not surprising that in this context, Romney uttered the words, clearly aimed at the average American, that if he wins, U.S. policy toward Russia will be less flexible and more rigid.

Neocon Triumvirate Harangue Globalist Forum, Call for Killing Iranians and Syrians

Consummate warmonger and perennial Senate fixture John McCain stepped out of the super-secret globalist Ambrosetti Forum in Italy the other day to take Obama to task for not killing more Muslims and Arabs and for dragging his feet on attacking Iran.

“In a way it’s almost like watching a train wreck,” said McCain about Obama’s approach to killing Persians.

The steady Zionization of Canada

If anyone wants to see what a US administration under Mormon-Zionist Mitt Romney would look like, one only has to look at the steady Zionization of Canada under the government of Tory Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Canada, a one-time independent-minded NATO member whose diplomatic offices were once valued by Third World governments as a trusted liaison to Washington, is now considered by many nations as more right-wing and anti-Muslim and anti-Arab than the United States. Canada’s recent decision to expel the Iranian embassy staff in Ottawa and call home Canadian diplomats in Tehran at the behest of Israel supporters in the Canadian Conservative Party and their allies in the right-wing government of Israel is a testament to Canada’s far-right foreign policy.

Iran slams 'neocon' Canadian government

Iran on Monday said Canada had a "neo-conservative extremist government" as it kept up a furious response to Ottawa's decision last week to cut diplomatic ties.

Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi used that description in an interview with the Iranian parliament's website in which he also said the Canadian government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper was "boundlessly defending international Zionism."

Romney's Neocon advisers want a Do-over

Behind the scenes the Neocon players, are now playing the neophyte Romney.

They want their "An American Century" Do-over -- and Mitt Romney is just their "front guy" to get their second go at it.

The cornerstone of Romney's foreign policy white paper is "American exceptionalism" -- just xeroxing a page ... from his neocon advisers.

Exposure Of Neocon American And Zionist Imperialist 9-11 Deception

Decent people around the World must realize the awful extent of this Neocon American and Zionist Imperialist 9-11 deception that has so far killed 21 million fellow human beings but which is resolutely ignored by Neocon American- and Zionist Imperialist-beholden mainstream media. The neo-liberal argument is that suspension of human rights at home and an endless War on Terror from Libya to Pakistan is required to prevent a repetition of 9-11 (3,000 dead) or a lesser atrocity such as the Madrid, London and Mumbai atrocities (scores to hundreds killed) . Yet the warmongers resolutely lie by omission over 20 million deaths, half American, linked to this same War on Terror.

This extraordinary Mainstream Establishment lying by omission is compelling proof of the utter fraudulence of the 9-11 deception that must take its place with other excuses for imperialist wars e.g. the sinking of the Maine in Havana Harbor (Spanish-American War), the sinking of the arms-laden Lusitania (US entry into WW1), Pearl Harbor (permitted to occur notwithstanding and US and UK pre-knowledge; US entry into WW2), Korean invasion of their own country (Korean War), the fictional Gulf of Tonkin Incident (US Indo-China War), alleged threat to US students (US invasion of Granada) and General Noriega's longstanding CIA-linked drug involvements (US invasion of Panama). These realities of the 9-11 deception are succinctly summarized below.

Democrats lionize Obama for foreign policy and maul Romney as a 'neocon' novice

The Democratic National Convention aimed to reignite the fire in the hearts and minds of 2008 Obama supporters — to remind Americans why they voted for the president four years ago and why they should support him again this coming November.

The speakers who took to the stage over the course of the DNC sang President Obama’s praises, highlighting the strength of his character as well as his track record in several policy areas. Viewers were reminded of the lives and the companies that were saved by "Obamacare" and the Recovery Act. Emotional testaments were delivered touting President Obama’s focus on veteran services, student loan programs, the DREAM Act and women’s issues.

But on Thursday, the final night of the convention, foreign policy took center stage. That's a policy area that pundits say has been dominated by the Republican Party for decades. And the Democrats were anything but nice.

Romney Neocon Foreign Policy Advisers Push Romney to the Extreme Right

The job of president of the United States is sometimes said to be three-quarters foreign policy. Despite this, presidential elections are often decided on domestic issues. In 2008 many questioned President Obama’s foreign and national security policy chops, having never served in uniform and serving only one term in the Senate. However, after four years in the chair and many successes under his belt, these arguments don’t carry much weight in 2012. Mitt Romney doesn’t possess a resume long on these areas either. His overseas campaign tour was unimpressive at best, and he said virtually nothing about the military, national security, or foreign policy in his convention speech in Tampa. With so little to go on, it is hard to imagine what policies a Romney administration would implement.

One would be forgiven for mistaking a list of Romney’s foreign policy and security advisers for a list of officials from the Bush era. Simply change the heading. Condoleezza Rice, John Bolton, Cofer Black, Dan Senor, Robert Zoellick, and Michael Hayden were all appointees of George W. Bush and are all advisers to Mitt Romney. It is important to have experienced folks to advise you, but it is more important that they have the right kind of experience. If one sets aside the partisan will to defend the record of George W. Bush, it is clear to see that these advisers were the architects of policy that the majority of Americans came to roundly reject. The wide victory margin of President Obama in 2008 is proof as he ran partially on a platform opposed to their policies.

Another neocon 'success story'

Today we learn that Iran is resupplying the Assad regime in Syria via Iraqi airspace. Hardly surprising, for two reasons. First, Syria is a key Iranian ally, so naturally Iran is doing what it can to keep Assad in power. Second, the al-Maliki government is not nearly as anti-Iranian as Saddam Hussein was, and in some ways is sympathetic to Tehran's position.

All of which reminds us what dunderheads the neocons were when they dreamed up the idea of invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein. Of course, all those liberal hawks who eventually went along with the idea were nearly as foolish.

From Neocon to Rothbardian

Writes Matthew Postell:

Thanks for spreading the message. I came to your site a few years ago, and your site turned me from a Neocon warmonger (and that's an understatement) to a Rothbardian libertarian. Actually, when I first read your blog/daily articles, I was heading for my second part of training for Marine Corps Officer Candidate School. I hated you, and I hated everything about your site. I mean, what patriot would plaster Anti-War across the top of his website...what a traitor. At the time, I liked to call myself a "libertarian with a strong foreign policy" type. I can honestly say I thank you now. Cognitive dissonance bites hard, and people like you and Laurence Vance helped open my eyes to the absurdity of the foreign policy I supported. Please take my humble $25 and help save another misinformed individual like myself. There will be plenty more coming your way soon. Thanks, Lew.

Ohh and just to let you know, I withdrew from the OCS program.

Saudi Arabia: The Neocons’ Once and Future Target

Shiites in the Gulf have already become enraged against the Saudis, so this element could serve as an invaluable propaganda instrument to intensify anti-Saudi feeling in the West in order to bring down Israel’s final powerful adversary, whose very existence precludes Israel’s achievement of total regional hegemony.

The American removal of Saddam had seemingly led to Iranian and Shiite ascendancy in the Middle East, with the Shiite demographic majority being able to dominate Iraq’s national government, though an autonomous Kurdish region was created, and the Sunnis threatened a civil war.

Romney's RNC Speech Previewed Mitt Neocon Foreign Policy Vision

Professors Bruce Jentleson and Charles Kupchan, respected voices on foreign affairs, argue in Foreign Policy magazine that Romney's vague and/or muddled approach on particular issues is not the real cause for concern. As they note, “It's his core world view. Guided by a Republican Party virtually devoid of moderate centrists, Romney has embraced a global assessment distorted by ideological excess, pledged to wield power in a way that will leave the nation weakened and isolated, and demonstrated a failure to appreciate the key linkages between strength at home and influence abroad.”

It’s a return to Cowboy Diplomacy, and given its simple-mindedness, perhaps 46 seconds was about right.

Romney's Neocon Foreign-Policy Clichés

I realize convention speeches aren't the place for think-tank-worthy critiques of an incumbent's foreign policy. But couldn't Romney do better than spout neocon abstractions that, when fleshed out, don't make any sense? He's so allergic to concrete specificity that he didn't even mention the war America is currently involved in! (Reminder to Mitt: That would be Afghanistan--and it's another example of a dictator-removing war launched by a Republican president that, um, hasn't gone exactly as planned.)

So convention watchers were left to wonder which high-profile convention speaker who did mention Afghanistan we should take as a Romney spokesperson--raving lunatic John McCain, who apparently wants to stay in Afghanistan forever, or doddering eccentric Clint Eastwood, who apparently wants to leave Afghanistan tomorrow? I'm more of an Eastwood guy myself. I doubt Romney even knows what sort of a guy he is. And I don't want to find out in real time.

Neocon Freedom House Outraged at Ron Paul

Sputters the CIA-friendly Freedom House:

“Especially disturbing is the hostility of Paul-style libertarians to every effort in the postwar period to use American power to advance the cause of freedom.”

"Freedom," in DC-speak, means US hegemony, of course. And see this:

“Would Ron Paul have supported Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi over two frustrating decades? Would he have encouraged the forces in Indonesia that ended dictatorship and forged the Muslim world’s largest democracy? Would he ignore Russian dissidents who oppose Vladimir Putin and, under constant duress from an all-powerful regime, seek moral sustenance from the United States?”

Do libertarians fail to fall for neocon disinfo and imperial propaganda? Yep, and so do millions of young people. (And thanks to Daniel McAdams)