UNAUTHORIZED (but assisted) Richard Perle Book to be Out in November 2007

-

perle.jpg
I received an email yesterday evening from Leigh Ann Ambrosi, Director of Marketing for Sterling Publications, announcing that Sterling’s new imprint, Union Square Press, had signed Alan Weisman — “a veteran producer with CBS News, 60 Minutes and Charlie Rose — to write Prince of Darkness — Richard Perle: The Kingdom, the Power, and the End of Empire in America.
Weisman authored Lone Star: The Extraordinary Life and Times of Dan Rather. The release refers to Richard Perle as a “hugely influential foreign policy thinker” and “a fixture of the Washington establishment for more than three decades.”
Strobe Talbott actually dubbed Perle “the prince of darkness” in his important Reagan era arms control book, Deadly Gambits: The Reagan Administration and the Stalemate in Nuclear Arms Control in which Talbott chronicled the near constant dueling between then Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle and then State Department Director of Politico-Military Affairs Richard Burt.
But what caught my eye in this otherwise OK press announcement of a book not out until Thanksgiving this year was this bit:

While not an authorized book, Perle has granted the author extraordinary access, with multiple one-on-one interviews.

Maybe I’m just too skeptical of Perle’s willingness to cooperate. While Sterling may be a good publishing house, this is not a Seymour Hersh expose on him. Perle is probably cooperating because he thinks he can trade his stories in a quid pro quo deal for kind treatment in the book.
The publisher and writer must be aware of what animates Perle’s interest to cooperate. In such a release announcing a biography of not only a hugely influential foreign policy thinker but a hugely controversial personality who was part of the bandwagon that duped America into a reckless war against Iraq, it would be useful to know what the writer is doing beforehand to make sure that he is not in fact seriously manipulated by Perle — who I admit is one of the most effectively shrewd, compelling, and frequently disturbing policy personalities in Washington.
I still want to know what Richard Perle knew and when he knew it when he told me in October 2002 that we would not find WMDs in Iraq.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

36 comments on “UNAUTHORIZED (but assisted) Richard Perle Book to be Out in November 2007

  1. pauline says:

    MP wrote:
    “But people like Perle actually have no power other than the power that is given to them by elected and bureaucratic officials.”
    Oh, I see, he doesn’t really have “dark prince” magical powers (as even inside-the-beltway-ers have called him), he’s just an ordinary guy who. . .what. . .did “his job” or added to the mass of dis-info and lies that were used in bring us into Iraq in March, 2003, with American lives and American dollars?! And, gee, Perle was just an innocent bystander as chairman of the DPB, right?
    What “more power” would AIPAC, Israel, and you want him to have?

    Reply

  2. Thomas Mc says:

    Maybe he should name the book, “The Extraordinary Lies of Richard Pearle, an autobiography.”
    Richard Pearle is one of those people that makes me believe in the existence of real evil.

    Reply

  3. MP says:

    I would never defend the despicable Perle.
    But people like Perle actually have no power other than the power that is given to them by elected and bureaucratic officials.

    Reply

  4. rich says:

    springbored–
    Still, the point I made holds. Richard Perle had a direct, obvious conflict of interest–which was ongoing AFTER he resigned as DPB Chair–because he remained on the Board for two years.
    Stepping down as Chair was presented as some sort of concession or response to the problem when it was nothing of the kind.
    Makes you wonder what was so important that he had to stay on for two more years to take care of. Makes you realize they had no intention of fixing that corruption. There wasn’t another soul able to function? That says it all.
    Got a link to cite?
    That they had to hide his eventual departure speaks to the disingenuous handling of the story in the media. I’m dimly remembering something now–but still. His eventual departure was NO VIctory.

    Reply

  5. troll_bait says:

    I want to know that too!
    I also wonder, about 2 years ago there was a story that Perle met with an Iraqi Official in France or somewhere, in the run up to war. The offical had some sort of deal that would allow Saddam to leave Iraq. And perle turned the offer down.
    I wanted to ask, Was that story true?
    Like the developing Iran story, (their 0ffer to set aside differences to work in Iraq) I’d like to know more about these threads. The meta story being Uber-Hawks that missed or ignored diplomatic solutions in the rush to invasion.

    Reply

  6. springbored says:

    Heya Rich–There were two resignations–first, from the leadership, second, from the body itself. The latter, in Feb. 2004, was, for me, the thriller. Here’s a snip from the Guardian:
    Richard Perle, the hawkish Pentagon adviser who was one of the most fervent advocates for the invasion of Iraq, has resigned, it emerged yesterday.
    Mr Perle’s resignation last week after 17 years at the Defence Policy Board, an advisory group, was not announced officially but was confirmed by the Pentagon and Mr Perle yesterday after a copy of his resignation letter was leaked overnight.
    In that letter, dated February 18, Mr Perle said he had decided to leave the board so that his views would not be attributed to George Bush or the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, in an election year.

    Reply

  7. Tony Foresta says:

    All the fascist Bush government warpimps are carving out their own shapeshifting positions to cravenly distance themselves from the bloody, costly catastrophic horrorshow, epic FAILURE, and excuse for wanton profiteering in Iraq.
    Pearle, and all the fascist Bush government warpimps are working like demons to shapeshift their positions in ways that will absolve themselves individually of any culpability or responsibility for the greatest strategic blunnder in American history.
    All these fascist chickenhawk pathological liars are cravenly quick to blame anyone, and everyone they can possibly imagine for the costly, bloody, noendinsight horrors, failures, fascist machinations, wanton profiteering, and ghoulish nightmare in Iraq they each singularly, and exclusively conjured, pimped, and ruthlessly prosecuted.
    A pox on their houses.
    Pearl, (like all the fascist chickenhawk warpimps in the Bush government) is a pathological liar, a reprobate, a criminal, and a fascist warmonger and war profiteer who does not deserve one nanoparticle of the peoples respect, credibility, goodwill, good faith, or trust.
    Boycott anything pimped by this fascist pathological liar. Decent Americans should not expend one penny advancing or rewarding the pathological lies of facscist chickenhawk warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars like Richard Pearl.
    “Deliver us from evil!”

    Reply

  8. rich says:

    springbored:–
    “I was sooo pleased to see Perle ousted from the DSB, I wrote a cheeky letter ”
    I don’t believe Perle was ever ousted from the Board–just yielded the chair to someone else. Which would never in any way diminish the influence of such a man.
    Tim Shorrock in The Nation:
    “Richard Perle’s resignation as chairman of Donald Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board on March 27 capped a tumultuous month for the neoconservative who spent the past decade stoking the fires for the US onslaught on Iraq. The trail to his resignation–as chairman, but not from the board itself–began with Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker exposé of Perle’s financial stakes in Trireme Partners, a private fund that is currying Saudi investment in homeland security companies, and the Autonomy Corporation, a British company that sells eavesdropping software to the FBI and to US, British and Italian intelligence.”
    Interesting bits about other board members too.
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20030421/shorrock

    Reply

  9. Pissed Off American says:

    “When Perle was working for Senator Scoop Jackson, he was investigated by the Justice Department and found to have violated US policies relating to unlawful transmission of sensitive classified US information to Israel.”
    Feith too was caught under similiar circumstances. In 1972 he was fired from the NSC for being under suspicion of passing classified intelligence to the Israelis.
    I am not being tongue in cheek when I comment periodically that our government has been infiltrated by foreign agents.

    Reply

  10. Kurt Nimmo says:

    When Perle was working for Senator Scoop Jackson, he was investigated by the Justice Department and found to have violated US policies relating to unlawful transmission of sensitive classified US information to Israel.
    “An FBI summary of a 1970 wiretap recorded Perle discussing classified information with someone at the Israeli embassy,” writes Paul Findley (They Dare To Speak Out, Chicago, Ill, Lawrence Hill Books 1989).”He came under fire in 1983 when newspapers reported he received substantial payments to represent the interests of an Israeli weapons company. Perle denied conflict of interest, insisting that, although he received payment for these services after he had assumed his position in the Defense Department, he was between government jobs when he worked for the Israeli firm.”
    In other words, Richard Perle is an Israeli spy.
    Perle should be expatriated immediately — or made to share a cell with Jonathan Pollard, the spy who spent 18 months collecting and selling classified American intelligence to Israel from his position in U.S. Naval Intelligence. So pleased were the Israelis with the information passed on to them, two of the four government officials who had dealt with Pollard were promoted (Col. Aviem Sella, Pollard,s primary contact, was given full control of a major Israeli Air Force base). So arrogant are the Israelis that Sharon asked Bush to pardon and release Pollard.
    If these are our friends, who needs enemies?

    Reply

  11. springbored says:

    I was sooo pleased to see Perle ousted from the DSB, I wrote a cheeky letter to the Pentagon volunteering myself for the open spot.
    Got a nice letter back too, though they messed my name up, somehow…
    Anyway, I think the DSB is great. We need more such boards–that is, when they’re not acting like boards in the Conrad Black sense…

    Reply

  12. Den Valdron says:

    Marcia,
    You can have your own opinion. For me, the thought of hearing Richard Perle uttering those magic words ‘You want fries with that?’ would be one of those supreme pleasures of life.

    Reply

  13. pauline says:

    Richard Perle was the chairman of the Defense Policy Board, “an advisory panel to the Pentagon made up of leading figures in national security and defense which backs laying the groundwork for overthrowing Saddam through military means. He previously served as assistant secretary of defense for international security policy in the Reagan Administration.”
    Maybe Steve or others here can verify that the Defense Policy Board has more power than our military generals, including the “Joint Chiefs of Staff” as far as telling the Pentagon what plans/actions to follow.

    Reply

  14. Springbored says:

    But, hey, I hear his house in France is pretty nice…
    Whatever one thinks about Perle, you’ve got to give the guy a tribute for working the system–and remaining relevant–when, time and time again, his actions merited permanent banishment from the national security community.
    There’s a lot to be told. Personally, I hope the gasbag talks a bit about…well…oh…his Reagan years.

    Reply

  15. Homer says:

    What I want to know is did Richard Perle smell like sulphur?
    Could you see the buds of his horns?
    What about his fangs?
    Did you happen to notice any sort of reflection?
    Could you detect a heart beat ?

    Reply

  16. JohnH says:

    Good catch POA– The AIPAC article is very similar to the BIG LIE that launched the PR drive for the Iraq war. On September 7, 2002, Bush appeared with Tony Blair and said, “when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied, finally denied access, a report came out of the Atomic… The IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon.” This revelation sowed panic and drove Congress more than anything else into voting for an open-ended war resolution. Three weeks later, on September 27, The Washington Times, hardly a liberal bastion, finally did what good journalists are supposed to do, which is to investigate the story, and found it to be a total fabrication. Furthermore, the U.N.’s chief nuclear weapons inspector, Mohamed ElBaradei said,”There is no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear program since the elimination of the program in the 1990s.”

    Reply

  17. Jerome Gaskins says:

    There Oughta Be A Law:
    against old, senile, idiots from the days of the Cold War & the Wars of The World having ANY influence over anything but their grandchildren and the dogs they feed. Two rules to ponder:
    1) No one who worked policy during any war may ever be involved in policy or lobbying more than 5 years from the end of hostilities.
    2) No one who worked in an administration more than 12 years old is allowed to work in a current administration in anything higher than a gardener’s position.

    Reply

  18. Marcia says:

    Perhaps the reason that Perle and Wolfowitz are among the two most despicable neocons is that they both went creeping out the back door the moment they saw the first plumes of smoke when their flower-throwing, sweets-eating plan went up in flames.
    They do not plan to sink with the ship.

    Reply

  19. downtown says:

    Why is anything this creep utters deemed newsworthy?
    Does anyone really care?

    Reply

  20. Marcia says:

    Dan Veldron:
    Richard Perle should go out and get a real job like the rest of us.
    I can think of a litany of things for him to do that would be much more unpleasant and well deserved than getting a job!

    Reply

  21. Den Valdron says:

    Wow, Perle is such a popular guy.
    Let me express a few thoughts. Perle’s personal corruption and conflicts of interest are certainly clear and on the record. But unfortunately, they’ve never been satisfactorily examined or explored. The man gives every appearance as being as dirty as a coal miner trapped in a sewer in the middle of a band of diseased monkeys. But somehow, he’s always been able to skate away from the law.
    Perle’s connections to Likud and his ongoing relationships with the worst of Israel’s political extremists is also an obvious and continuing story that once again has never been satisfactorily explored. I tend to approach Israel-bashing with a certain amount of skepticism, and I’m willing to extend Israel a pass on certain issues. But Perle seems to be one of those textbook cases where you really do have to question his dual loyalties and his political agendas. There’s certainly real issues here.
    Perle’s extremism, his dishonest, his belligerance are all on display and well acknowledged, as it should be.
    As far as I can tell, the man is unrepentant because the very qualities and attributes that we condemn him for have served him very well and have consistently shielded him from attack, while helping to elevate him.
    It seems that there is money and success in being a corrupt traitor who espouses extremist viewpoints and helps to start wars for other people to die in.
    Who would have thunk.
    But I’ll add my own two cents: Perle is a fool. For all his urbanity, for all his apparent charm, for all his self confessed brilliance, and for all the accolades poured on by his acolytes… this emperor has no clothes.
    Think about it. What the hell has Perle ever done that anyone should respect? Does he have a track record as an academic? No. Do we have a brilliant record as a diplomat? An economist? An ambassador? A businessman? A journalist? A writer? No. Perle’s list of accomplishments, his list of qualifications, the roster of his skills, the measure of his intellect is a big ‘fuck all.’
    He’s not written a book worthy of the name (An End to Evil’ is not a book, but an exercise of masturbation with a willing boytoy, going by the pseudonym David Frum [Who is actually a real person and a somewhat better writer than the book would suggest].) He’s never been in an environment where real talent or real accomplishment was a requirement.
    His whole modern career is confined to the ideological hothouses of fringe Washington loony toons. He’s a classic recipient of Wingnut Welfare. He’s been nakedly wrong on every single policy issue (including his embarrassing embrace of Ahmad Chalabi). His policy ideas are embarrassingly poorly thought out, uniformly ignorant of the countries that he pronounces upon, his grasp of economics, politics, societies is deplorable.
    His reputation consists entirely of an endless circle jerk. He kisses his friends asses. They kiss his ass. And at appropriate points, everyone proclaims it ‘Delicious!!!’ His sole gift is in having lunch and hosting gatherings for people who will do him good.
    Richard Perle should go out and get a real job like the rest of us.

    Reply

  22. Marcia says:

    From Steve’s post
    “a hugely influential foreign policy thinker”
    I do not agree that the qualifier of “thinker” applies to Perle. A Policy manipulator, yes but a thinker…No. There is a world of difference between the two.
    I too wish I knew his address in the Luberon where it seems he has a house. Even at my advanced age nothing would give me more pleasure than driving by (I am going to the Luberon next month to visit friends) and making an obscene gesture in front of his place or throwing a curse over it…that all the tomatoes rot, that lightning fall on the roof, that no cricket sings on the grounds and that he sleep in the shade of a walnut tree where the death of dampness lies.
    I could enlarge the curse to include all of those wishing wishes came true.
    Why believe anything this man says, and why buy a book about this unsavory character?

    Reply

  23. sdemetri says:

    What is significant, poa, about the aipac statement is that is coincides with a “line in the sand” Bush drew in not only not allowing Iran to acquire a bomb, but to also not acquire the knowledge to acquire one. Sam Gardiner was interviewed on Democracy Now today talking about this. The aipac statement is closer to the Bush tipping point… industrial capability to produce 98% pure uranium, weapons grade purity, not that they have it, or are close to having it. Creating a cascading centrifuge array with about 164 centrifuges I think was accomplished. Creating a 3000 centrifuge array may be done in 6 months. Running the array long enough, and having sufficiently pure uranium hexafluoride gas to feed the cascade is another matter altogether. Arms Control Wonk has good discussions on that.
    What is not good news is if not letting Iran acquire the knowledge or capability of a 3000 centrifuge array is the tipping point, we should fear an attack sooner rather than later.
    Also, Gen. Caldwell, according to Juan Cole, is putting Moqtada al-Sadr in Iran hiding out. Others put him in Iraq in old hideouts. Yesterday US and Iraqi forces raided his offices and were taking out material. Are they setting up an “Iranian connection” through him as a pretense to attack? Will they find the smoking gun evidence needed to “prove” the connection between Sadr and Iran?

    Reply

  24. reticulant says:

    You\\\’ll find Perle selling the same assertion in Sep 2002 [ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/congress/2002_hr/02-09-26perle.htm ]
    \\\”The simple truth is that the inspectors will never find anything the location of which has not been discovered through intelligence operations. Unless we can obtain information, from defectors or by technical means, that points the inspectors to specific sites, we are most unlikely to find what we are looking for.\\\”
    One war, one occupation, with free, unfettered access to \\\”defectors,\\\” \\\”technical means,\\\” any \\\”specific site\\\” in Iraq absent the controlling regime and stealth of Saddam Hussein … it\\\’s apparent Perle knew nothing in Sep 2002 while suspecting everything, which, as it turns out, meant the same thing.
    As a result, we see no there, there, where Perle is concerned other Perle\’s (successful) commitment to contrive a war which would allay the \”existential\” fears of JINSA, WINEP, AIPAC et al.

    Reply

  25. Pissed Off American says:

    Within two hours of posting AIPAC’s lie, cited above, it dissappeared off of their website. This is the second time I have seen the AIPAC website remove material, (coincidentally?), after it was cited on this blog. As far as I can tell, it was not archived, it was simply removed.
    A coincidence? Probably. But why was the article removed? If its citation here was not the reason, what was the reason?
    Regardless, anyone reading it, as cited above, can surely see it for what it is; OBVIOUS propaganda, designed to mislead and alarm the American public. I congratulate AIPAC for removing it. But the cat is out of the bag. Many of us KNOW you are lying to us, and that you are seeking to advance your agenda through fear-mongering and propaganda. Hiding the lies does not erase them.

    Reply

  26. rich says:

    When Richard Perle was chair of the Defense Policy Board, conflicts of interest were uncovered due to his holdings in Trireme Partners, a private fund that sought Saudi backing.
    He was forced to resign. As chair.
    But not from the Board itself.
    So, the conflict of interest is ongoing. But consider the implications: the press, the opposition, the mechanisms of governance–are all so supine, battered, corrupt–that they couldn’t even resolve a blatant conflict of interest by a guy so viscerally extreme as Perle. A guy with no compunction about profit, dirty pool, or shrill pro-war rhetoric.
    Which is no surprise.
    But think: No real effort was made to investigate. No real effort was made to capitalize politicallly. No real effort was made to correct the non-functioning governance at the Pentagon. Again, no surprise. But it IS a measure of the insensate pols, insensible press, and the rotten corpse of the civil service iteself.

    Reply

  27. JohnH says:

    POA–What’s even more outrageous to me is that no one in Congress, the foreign policy establishment, the national security mafia, or their stooges in the press are the least bit interested in learning why we went to war. Don’t ask, don’t tell. A beltway black out on a massive scale. Each of them is happy to lambast the way the war was run and gripe about deceptions. But each of them publicly subscribes to at least one of those proven lies. Slimy bastards, indeed.

    Reply

  28. liz says:

    In my humble opinion Richard Perle is a criminal. Why would anyone take him seriously anymore? He says things to stir the international pot then goes and hides until the pot needs more stirring. He and people like him are what is wrong in DC. ( Again, my humble opinion only)

    Reply

  29. Pissed Off American says:

    Interesting that he said in 2002 that we wouldn’t find any WMDs. He was just on the news, saying that he REALLY BELIEVED that Saddam was making WMDs before we went to war.
    Posted by JohnH
    Well, that does not conflict with what he told Steve. He based his assertion that we “would not find” WMDs on the caveat that it was because Saddam had hid them, or moved them out of Iraq. Perhaps he was one of the few liars that realized he needed to have an excuse to cover his lies, because the lies would surely be uncovered. But really, it appears he had, and has, very little to worry about. Its not as though our current crop of pseudo “representatives” seem to be very concerned about the fact we were lied to. In fact, I really don’t see any of them saying ANYTHING about the LIES that launched this debacle. I just see a bunch of complicit rats scurrying for position, never mind the crimes that got us here. Yes, Perle is a real slimey bastard. But no more slimey than those that allowed, ignored, and forgave his treason. These criminals like Perle are going to get off scott-free, and THAT is going to be the fault of the ilk like Hillary, Hagel, Pelosi,Reid, Hunter, etc, who REFUSE to institute the mechanisms through which the Bush Administration could be held accountable for its crimes. They are all too complicit, and realize that investigations and indictments might very well bring the WHOLE house down around their ears.

    Reply

  30. Steve Clemons says:

    RG — Thanks for the correction. I knew that and was rushing this morning and mistyped. Appreciate it,
    Steve Clemons
    http://www.TheWashingtonNote.com

    Reply

  31. JohnH says:

    Perle will feel right at home in Southern France. He’ll be in good company. A lot of deposed dictators live there:
    http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/01/13/decline-and-fall-saddams-riviera-villa-rots/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Ffrance%2Fstory%2F0%2C%2C1989395%2C00.html&frame=true
    He might even have a shot at buying Saddam’s old villa. Meanwhile it’s a good place to kick back, relax, and think up the next BIG LIE.
    Interesting that he said in 2002 that we wouldn’t find any WMDs. He was just on the news, saying that he REALLY BELIEVED that Saddam was making WMDs before we went to war.

    Reply

  32. Pissed Off American says:

    Sorry for the long post…
    but….
    While we are on the subject of people or entities that “duped America into a reckless war”, one cannot ignore the repeat performance being waged by Israel and AIPAC, that echos the rhetoric from the neo-cons. Remember, AIPAC seeks to influence AMERICAN foreign policy through its lobbying efforts. The propaganda contained on its website TARGETS Americans. Here is the lead item on AIPAC’s website’s home page. Note the headline, and it’s blatantly dishonest wording……..
    IAEA: Iran Nearing Nuclear Weapons Production Capability
    Iran is continuing illicit nuclear work in defiance of the international community.
    The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Monday warned that Iran has mastered crucial nuclear technology since August and could be as little as six months away from being able to enrich uranium on an industrial scale – a key step toward developing nuclear weapons, The Financial Times reported. IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said even if the concern that Tehran might acquire technical knowledge about uranium enrichment was “relevant six months ago, it is not relevant today because Iran has been running these centrifuges for at least six months.” Iran has ignored the U.N. Security Council’s demand that it end its illicit atomic work and faces additional sanctions if its non-compliance continues.
    http://www.aipac.org/
    Now, here is a news article relating to El Baradei’s actual comments. Note how the AIPAC article selectively edited El Baradei’s comments in an attempt to misrepresent the TRUE timeline that El Baradei lays out in regards to Iran’s ability to manufacture a nuclear weapon…..
    Sydney Morning Herald
    Iran bomb is 10 years away, says ElBaradei
    February 21, 2007
    LONDON: Iran may be able to enrich uranium on a mass scale in six months but it could be 10 years away from being able to build a nuclear bomb, the chief United Nations nuclear monitor says.
    Mohamed ElBaradei, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the Financial Times in London that since August Iran had been using centrifuges at a pilot plant in the town of Natanz to enrich uranium.
    Dr ElBaradei said he thought Iran could set up an industrial-scale capacity of 3000 centrifuges within the next 12 months. That would be enough to begin producing fissile material for a bomb. “It could be six months, it could be a year,” Dr ElBaradei told the paper.
    Fears that Iran might learn enough about uranium enrichment might have “been relevant six months ago, [but] it is not relevant today because Iran has been running these centrifuges for at least six months”, Dr ElBaradei said. Uranium is enriched to be civilian reactor fuel but can also make the explosive core of nuclear bombs.
    The UN Security Council imposed sanctions in December in an attempt to force Iran to halt all enrichment work, but it is unlikely that it will meet today’s deadline to suspend the work.
    However, Dr ElBaradei tried to dispel alarm. “There’s a big difference between acquiring the knowledge for enrichment and developing a bomb,” he said.
    According to US and British intelligence estimates, Iran was still five to 10 years away from building a nuclear bomb, and he warned against “hype” over Tehran’s nuclear progress.
    Dr ElBaradei, who was planning to report back to governments today, was due to meet Iran’s nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, in Vienna yesterday amid the spiralling tensions over the country’s nuclear program.
    The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said yesterday that Iran wanted talks over its nuclear program but would not accept preconditions to freeze uranium enrichment. Mr Larijani has suggested a compromise under which Tehran would place a formal limit on the degree of its enrichment as a guarantee that it is not seeking an atomic bomb.
    Dr ElBaradei said: “The ideal situation is to make sure that there is no industrial capacity, that there is full inspection” of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
    Agence France-Presse
    Copyright © 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
    http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/fairenough/smh26.html
    When one sees such flagrant deception based propaganda on the AIPAC website, how can someone possibly fail to recall the same kind of tactics being used to incite the American public into accepting the invasion of Iraq? AIPAC needs to be reined in, and its propaganda efforts curtailed. Espionage, propaganda, bribery of our elected officials, and political intimidation ARE NOT the actions of an entity working towards America’s best interests. And make no mistake, the close alliance that the neo-con activists hold with right wing zionism is no coincidence. You CANNOT separate Perle’s motives and agendas from Israel’s. They are one and the same.

    Reply

  33. Punchy says:

    Perle said we would not find them. He didn’t say (from your post) that Saddam didn’t have them. That is great politic-ing, b/c it allows them to later claim that the WMDs were “moved to Syria” or “Iran” and the mere search for them gives them an indefinate timetable to stay in Iraq.
    It seems, in fact, a way to later claim we had to invade (fill in the blank) b/c they’re housing/hiding/using Saddam’s WMDs.
    Either that, or he knew all about “Curveball” and his completely fabricated stories.

    Reply

  34. sdemetri says:

    A man of his intelligence and credentials could no doubt use this opportunity for a little revisionist history making as few know the history to begin with. A great opportunity for him, seems like.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *